# Jim Sterling Pro Reviewer and Youtube Personality DDOS'd Over 'Low' Score Zelda BotW Review



## AmandaRose (Mar 13, 2017)

You have the right to free speech
As long as
You're not dumb enough to actually try it


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

Rabid Nintendo fans . Just sad.


----------



## Arras (Mar 13, 2017)

Yeah, it's shit. But given how influential this guy is, how many insane fans there are and the ease of doing something like this, it's somewhat inevitable. I'm sure there are many more people who would respectfully disagree, but those aren't nearly as vocal/newsworthy.


----------



## linuxares (Mar 13, 2017)

WTF seriously?! He didn't find the game as enjoyable as other people. Fucking deal with it. I personally feel the game is a 9/10, it was a longtime ago I really felt adventure in a game. It's not a perfect 10/10 on the otherhand for me. The framedrops are the issue here.


----------



## HaloEffect17 (Mar 13, 2017)

The people who DDOS'd him are just acting like children. Let the reviewer express his opinion.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Mar 13, 2017)

I don't agree with Jim Sterling on this but to DDoS him? That's just horrible. Everyone is entitled to their opinion!


----------



## VinsCool (Mar 13, 2017)

Hopefully @Tom Bombadildo is safe from this shit lmao.


----------



## WiiUBricker (Mar 13, 2017)

Serves him right. How dare he trash Zelda


----------



## HaloEffect17 (Mar 13, 2017)

VinsCool said:


> Hopefully @Tom Bombadildo is safe from this shit lmao.


Tempers will keep him safe.


----------



## DarkenedMatter (Mar 13, 2017)

I just feel like his opinion should be counted as a normal person on Metacritic. He's not anyone special imo so what gives him the credibility to be an "actual" critic?


----------



## VMM (Mar 13, 2017)

I remember that the creator of Flappy Bird received death threats for the game been "too hard".
Now people threaten a reviewer for a not fantastic score. What the hell is wrong with these people?


----------



## RaMon90 (Mar 13, 2017)

7/10? Wow, it isn't that bad.


Edit:i hope im not next lol


----------



## VinsCool (Mar 13, 2017)

RaMon90 said:


> 7/10? Wow, it isn't that bad.


Exactly. Sadly though, anything below 10/10 triggers people.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 13, 2017)

Pfft, obvious clickbait review is obvious. All the other reviewers gave it a 10/10, so he's just shitting on the game to look edgy and "different". I bet he just looked at all the 0/10 user reviews on Metacritic and used those as complaints instead of beating it himself. He just doesn't understand the mechanics, maybe he should actually look at the game from an in-depth point of view (because obviously he hasn't if he doesn't like some of the mechanics LOL). 

I bet he wrote this review while eating Pringles and drinking energy drinks LOL

:^)


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Mar 13, 2017)

DarkenedMatter said:


> I just feel like his opinion should be counted as a normal person on Metacritic. He's not anyone special imo so what gives him the credibility to be an "actual" critic?


Many e-Celebs are critics whether on YouTube, RT, MetaCrtic or whatever. It's better not to take critics opinion face value because in the end, it's just another opinion.



VinsCool said:


> Exactly. Sadly though, anything below 10/10 triggers people.


Not so much the score number itself but his opinion, at least for me.


----------



## TobiasAmaranth (Mar 13, 2017)

What a wuss. My items break, waaaaah. It's not as easy as other Zelda games, waaaaah.  Well guess what? REAL LIFE IS HARD! This is good practice for learning how to manage assets efficiently! I know how to do that and GASP, I never run out of weapons. You also have to understand that, at times, RESOURCES GET TIGHT. That's. Life! XD

As for framerate drops, the only time I get lag is when the game chokes a bit on enemies-are-falling-a-long-way physics. Particularly with Moblins. I'm fairly sure they can manage to fix that one. And given how buggy most "AAA" titles tend to be on launch, be glad the only issues you've got are the framerate glitch and a few unobtainable treasure chests.

Shrines: 116
Korok Seeds: 441 + ~125 (Only 441 are needed for all upgrades)
Days played: 14 loooong days.
Game: Unbeaten, still have about 5% of the world to explore.
(PS: Where are the last 3 heart containers at?? :/ If they aren't at Hebra peak, then I'm confused...)


----------



## DarkenedMatter (Mar 13, 2017)

Saiyan Lusitano said:


> Many e-Celebs are critics whether on YouTube, RT, MetaCrtic or whatever. It's better not to take critics opinion face value because in the end, it's just another opinion.
> 
> 
> Not so much the score number itself but his opinion, at least for me.


Yeah, I understand. It's just that I never really cared or knew who he was until this. He just seems like a twat in general. He puts off a holier than thou vibe but idk.


----------



## flame1234 (Mar 13, 2017)

The game still looks fun, even though it's out.
You never knew "mountain climbing simulator" was fun until now. 

That GameSpot guy was fired over low Nintendo Switch score.


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

Don't see why people are asking what makes him credible. What makes the reviwers at ign etc credible? They put a score out you agree with, so they are credible? We already know ign and the big sites are influenced by ads (not even speculation, someone literally got fired from Gamespot for giving a bad review to a game that was being heavily advertised).


----------



## HaloEliteLegend (Mar 13, 2017)

I read his review and disagreed with much of it, but he is entitled to his own opinion and should not be attacked for it. Respectful disagreement, debate, and civil dissent is alright but DDoSing and other attacks don't do anything. You're not going to magically erase Jim fucking Sterling's review or silence him or get his score kicked off of Metacritic. Even Jim Sterling agrees that Breath of the Wild is a mostly fantastic game. Breath of the Wild IS a fantastic game! Scores are subjective! Get a grip! No need to stoop so low. You don't need one person on the interweb to validate your opinion, especially when 79 other major reviewers gave it 9s and 10s.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 13, 2017)

This is pathetic... "Your opinion is different than mine, I'm going to ruin your way of life." 

Get a life, kiddos.


----------



## skawo (Mar 13, 2017)

TobiasAmaranth said:


> (PS: Where are the last 3 heart containers at?? :/ If they aren't at Hebra peak, then I'm confused...)



If you upgraded the Stamina to full, then you can't get the last 3 containers (unless you swap them at Hateno Village). The game caps you at either 2 and 2/5ths stamina or 27 containers. Perhaps because DLC.


---
On topic: Pathetic. I agree with Sterling on most things, and would also give it a 7 or 8.


----------



## ItsKipz (Mar 13, 2017)

Jesus please tell me this is a prank. People are ddosing this guy over that review? Sure, i dont agree with everything per se, but _really?_


----------



## RaMon90 (Mar 13, 2017)

97/100 is seriously great, I'd be happy.


----------



## RemixDeluxe (Mar 13, 2017)

Holy shit, asking for someone to get hung for having an opinion about a video game. This is embarrassing and LoZ is my favorite video game series. It's not like whatever he says Will make me enjoy my game less. People need to see that too.

@TobiasAmaranth I 100% agree with you especially the part where life you have to resource manage often. I had the exact same thoughts as I was playing through the game, it felt similar to what I went through when I lived on my own.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

Lol, now people will have a reason to say we are childish fanboys -.- Well, as long as this review isn't as poorly argumented as the crap on GBATemp, I'm fine with it. Again, I'm all with consistency. 7 for BOTW is fine as long as you didn't give 6.5 to Sonic Boom 06


----------



## XDel (Mar 13, 2017)

This is news?


----------



## VinsCool (Mar 13, 2017)

ItsKipz said:


> Jesus please tell me this is a prank. People are ddosing this guy over that review? Sure, i dont agree with everything per se, but _really?_


Yes. It's real. The site was (and probably still is?) Down last night.


----------



## TobiasAmaranth (Mar 13, 2017)

skawo said:


> If you upgraded the Stamina to full, then you can't get the last 3 containers (unless you swap them at Hateno Village). The game caps you at either 2 and 2/5ths stamina or 27 containers. Perhaps because DLC.
> 
> Hah, it's Skawo. Hey. And dang, but I guess that gives a point to the Hearty foods, and helps lengthen the Master Sword's beam effect. It's just less pretty.
> 
> ...


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

EDIT: I'm still a bit pissed off by the fact that people complain about difficulty, while they all were "Nintendo is for kids, too easy games"


----------



## Sizednochi (Mar 13, 2017)

Jim is an asshole. He gave the amount needed to tank the score from 98 to 97. His negative points are durability and stamina wheel. That's it. He praises the game, says it's fantastic but "some flaws hinder it" and that's the two things he /talked about. No way in hell the game should deserve a 7/10 for that. But he did it anyway to fuck with the metacritic score.

DDOSing is pathetic but he's just as bad as the people doing it.


----------



## Monado_III (Mar 13, 2017)

Armadillo said:


> Don't see why people are asking what makes him credible. What makes the reviwers at ign etc credible? They put a score out you agree with, so they are credible? We already know ign and the big sites are influenced by ads (not even speculation, someone literally got fired from Gamespot for giving a bad review to a game that was being heavily advertised).


Most journalists at professional game sites either have some expierence in the games industry or have some sort of schooling in journalism or even both. This dude has a right to his opinion but when your opinion is controversial and *poorly* backed up, this stuff will unfourtunatly happen by the more immature in the fanbase.
(like his review reads like it could've been written by a middle schooler who's failing english who had help from a minimum wage EA)


----------



## VinsCool (Mar 13, 2017)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Lol, now people will have a reason to say we are childish fanboys -.- Well, as long as this review isn't as poorly argumented as the crap on GBATemp, I'm fine with it. Again, I'm all with consistency. 7 for BOTW is fine as long as you didn't give 6.5 to Sonic Boom 06


"Poorly argumented"

Get the fuck over it, jesus christ.

Jim Sterling arrived at the same score of 7/10.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

Sizednochi said:


> Jim is an asshole. He gave the amount needed to tank the score from 98 to 97. His negative points are durability and stamina wheel. That's it. He praises the game, says it's fantastic but "some flaws hinder it" and that's the two things he /talked about. No way in hell the game should deserve a 7/10 for that. But he did it anyway to fuck with the metacritic score.
> 
> DDOSing is pathetic but he's just as bad as the people doing it.



If he really is an asshole, then this is different. Stamina Wheel and breakable shields were in Skyward Sword, I'd be curious to see what score did this game get.


----------



## Saiyan Lusitano (Mar 13, 2017)

flame1234 said:


> You never knew "mountain climbing simulator" was fun until now.


Indeed. It's incredibly fun to climb mountains in this game.


----------



## Veho (Mar 13, 2017)

It's not a DDoS, his server just can't handle the amount of clicks he baited with that low review score  ;O; 

#stopclickbait 

;O;


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

Monado_III said:


> Most journalists at professional game sites either have some expierence in the games industry or have some sort of schooling in journalism or even both. This dude has a right to his opinion but when your opinion is controversial and *poorly* backed up, this stuff will unfourtunatly happen by the more immature in the fanbase.
> (like his review reads like it could've been written by a middle schooler who's failing english who had help from a minimum wage EA)




And that makes them more credible even though we know for a fact that reviews are swayed by advertising revenue and in the past exclusive access for garanteed high scores? Not speculation, but fact, it's happened in the past or who can forgot the 2/10 for football manager by ign, by one of the "credible" journalists who went on a rant because it didn't play like Fifa and ign eventually had to pull it.

Just because they went to school for it, doesn't make them more credible in a corrupt industry.


----------



## DarkenedMatter (Mar 13, 2017)

Armadillo said:


> Don't see why people are asking what makes him credible. What makes the reviwers at ign etc credible? They put a score out you agree with, so they are credible? We already know ign and the big sites are influenced by ads (not even speculation, someone literally got fired from Gamespot for giving a bad review to a game that was being heavily advertised).


What? Can't reply to me directly?


----------



## linuxares (Mar 13, 2017)

Armadillo said:


> And that makes them more credible even though we know for a fact that reviews are swayed by advertising revenue and in the past exclusive access for garanteed high scores? Not speculation, but fact, it's happened in the past or who can forgot the 2/10 for football manager by ign, by one of the "credible" journalists who went on a rant because it didn't play like Fifa and ign eventually had to pull it.


And Jim Sterling has a terrible track record with Nintendo so even that can be consider bias. Everyone is bias, everyone. One way or another.
What you need to do either A) Play the game yourself and make up your mind about it. B) Find reviewers you trust and have the same taste as you. C) Listen to the general reviews and try to figure out if the game is for you or not.


----------



## invaderyoyo (Mar 13, 2017)

Sizednochi said:


> Jim is an asshole. He gave the amount needed to tank the score from 98 to 97. His negative points are durability and stamina wheel. That's it. He praises the game, says it's fantastic but "some flaws hinder it" and that's the two things he /talked about. No way in hell the game should deserve a 7/10 for that. But he did it anyway to fuck with the metacritic score.
> 
> DDOSing is pathetic but he's just as bad as the people doing it.


A game doesn't start at 10 and then get docked each time something is wrong with it. I'm with him. I think the stamina wheel is annoying, the framerate drops are annoying and the breakable weapons are super annoying. 

Nothing wrong with breakable weapons, it's just BotW's implementation that sucks. I'm always thinking about when my weapon is gonna break since they break so fast.

Other than that the game's pretty good. I'd give it a solid 8, maybe 8.5.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

For those who still think Nintendo paid the other reviewers:
http://www.ign.com/games/1-2-switch/nintendo-switch-20063624
http://www.ign.com/games/super-bomberman-r/nintendo-switch-20063632
http://www.ign.com/games/sonic-boom/wii-u-20012785
http://www.ign.com/games/mario-tennis-ultra-smash/wii-u-20038885


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

DarkenedMatter said:


> What? Can't reply to me directly?



So I didn't quote you, big deal.




linuxares said:


> And Jim Sterling has a terrible track record with Nintendo so even that can be consider bias. Everyone is bias, everyone. One way or another.
> What you need to do either A) Play the game yourself and make up your mind about it. B) Find reviewers you trust and have the same taste as you. C) Listen to the general reviews and try to figure out if the game is for you or not.



That's fair enough, but people only seem to care about bias if it causes the game to get a lower score than they think it should.

Most give it 10/10, yeah it definitely deserves that. Can't be any bias towards Nintendo or Zelda. Most reviews don't even mention technical issues or just handwave them as not a big deal. A smaller game will certainly get pulled up on them though. Same with other big titles like GTA. Never does it get pulled up on performance issues, while other open world games will.

No one seems to give a shit about the bias to big name titles, with big advertising budgets behind them. Dare to rate it lower and it's "bias" or click bait.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

invaderyoyo said:


> A game doesn't start at 10 and then get docked each time something is wrong with it. I'm with him. I think the stamina wheel is annoying, the framerate drops are annoying and the breakable weapons are super annoying.
> 
> Nothing wrong with breakable weapons, it's just BotW's implementation that sucks. I'm always thinking about when my weapon is gonna break since they break so fast.
> 
> Other than that the game's pretty good. I'd give it a solid 8, maybe 8.5.


Yeah, and that's the thing. For the sake of consistency, you can't give BOTW a 7. Because terrible games get similar ratings. 8 or 8.5 is fine, because it would be actually on par with the review and the flaws pointed out


----------



## DarkenedMatter (Mar 13, 2017)

He clearly gave it something lower just to be spiteful now that I actually looked into it and I couldn't care less about the score being lowered.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

The reason why IGN couldn't have given BOTW a 7 without being assholes: http://www.ign.com/games/mario-vs-donkey-kong-2015/wii-u-20019889
Yeah. MvsDK: Tipping Stars, a random unkown MvsDK on Wii U, with a poor lifetime, got a 6.8. All's said.


----------



## Greymane (Mar 13, 2017)

I swear, whenever i think i have enough popcorn in stock shit like this happens.

Also someone saying that he doesn't like a game as much as you, doesn't lessen your ability to enjoy the game.


----------



## Chary (Mar 13, 2017)

You know, the most hilarious part that all these people are saying that critics give low scores to mess with the Open/Metacritic average. Yet, publications are usually advised against that, and lesser known sites jeopardize themselves for even doing that sort of thing. He came to that 7 because it was his opinion. (7=Good, guys) not because he wanted to troll an aggregate site. Lol. Not to mention, Nintendo is skittish about review copies, and too many low scores can made them reverse even giving out codes at all to certain sites. Also--giving a score to purely mess with the Metacritic would be pointless, as publishers usually only get monetary bonuses at 85+, and no way would BOTW ever get to falling to that point, so there was nothing for him to jeopardize towards Nintendo. It's sick that bratty children get so butthurt over their precious Zelda ONLY getting "good" out of 10, rather than perfectomgsogoodidied10timesfromhowgooditis out of 10.


----------



## osaka35 (Mar 13, 2017)

He's an idiot, but silencing idiots isn't really the best way to go.


----------



## Rockhoundhigh (Mar 13, 2017)

I have mixed feelings. I like the guy and I don't think he would ever put out a score just for attention but he can be scathingly cynical and and sometimes I have a hard time seeing eye to eye with him on his opinions on games and the games industry. In the end, whether I think his points against the game are fair doesn't matter though. A score comes down to personal enjoyment and if he can't see what all the hype is I imagine that's more alienating than anything else. Same goes for me and my experience with the Uncharted series. I never liked them. What people need to understand is how any single individual feels about a game shouldn't affect your own enjoyment of it. I actually adore a number of games with mixed reception. The reason review aggregator sites like Metacritic exist in the first place is that you get an overall look at a game's reception. If reviews like Jim's are the exception rather than the rule than you can comfortably ignore them (or throw a tantrum apparently).


----------



## MYST78 (Mar 13, 2017)

These corporate slaves never learn.


----------



## linuxares (Mar 13, 2017)

Armadillo said:


> No one seems to give a shit about the bias to big name titles, with big advertising budgets behind them. Dare to rate it lower and it's "bias" or click bait.


Problem it's a Zelda game, people been longing for a proper one since Twilight Princess (As we know, Skywards Sword got so much critic because of the controls) and when it comes and gets praised, some small brained people can't take it if their game even gets the slightest critic that isn't a glowing praise.
I also hope that there is no consparicy behind why a lot of big budget games get praise, it's not always the case. Never the less, GTAV for example is one game I don't rate as high like others do. It's a very good game, but it's not a perfect title like others think it is. San Andreas for example, I hate that game so much. It's so boring according to me. But others love it.
So opinions are in the end what determing what score the games should get. Or as I prefer myself, no score at all but rather a well written summary.


----------



## skawo (Mar 13, 2017)

Honestly, myself, I wonder how much of BotW's metacritic score is just "alright, let's score it a bit higher so people don't shit on us".


----------



## linuxares (Mar 13, 2017)

Chary said:


> You know, the most hilarious part that all these people are saying that critics give low scores to mess with the Open/Metacritic average. Yet, publications are usually advised against that, and lesser known sites jeopardize themselves for even doing that sort of thing. He came to that 7 because it was his opinion. (7=Good, guys) not because he wanted to troll an aggregate site. Lol. Not to mention, Nintendo is skittish about review copies, and too many low scores can made them reverse even giving out codes at all to certain sites. Also--giving a score to purely mess with the Metacritic would be pointless, as publishers usually only get monetary bonuses at 85+, and no way would BOTW ever get to falling to that point, so there was nothing for him to jeopardize towards Nintendo. It's sick that bratty children get so butthurt over their precious Zelda ONLY getting "good" out of 10, rather than perfectomgsogoodidied10timesfromhowgooditis out of 10.


Just wait until Persona 5 comes out and it just happen to get a 6/10 from someone. People will flip on that as well.


----------



## Deathbot64 (Mar 13, 2017)

7/10 isn't even a bad review. Like wtf?


----------



## jimbo13 (Mar 13, 2017)

Fuck him & his review DDOS is too light, I hope Trump deports him


----------



## RemixDeluxe (Mar 13, 2017)

Saiyan Lusitano said:


> Indeed. It's incredibly fun to climb mountains in this game.


I really admire your profile pic. Looks like it was pulled from a legit anime of the game. Feels like Studio Ghibli quality.


----------



## Sizednochi (Mar 13, 2017)

invaderyoyo said:


> A game doesn't start at 10 and then get docked each time something is wrong with it. I'm with him. I think the stamina wheel is annoying, the framerate drops are annoying and the breakable weapons are super annoying.
> 
> Nothing wrong with breakable weapons, it's just BotW's implementation that sucks. I'm always thinking about when my weapon is gonna break since they break so fast.
> 
> Other than that the game's pretty good. I'd give it a solid 8, maybe 8.5.



I didn't say the game deserves a 10 per see. But he didn't address performance issues for example. His only complaints were stamina wheel and durability. Going by what he says he should have given it a 8.5 at least. But he gave the right amount needed to get the metacritic score down to 97. He also gave Horizon a 9.5/10. Really makes you think....


----------



## SuzieJoeBob (Mar 13, 2017)

HaloEffect17 said:


> The people who DDOS'd him are just acting like children. Let the reviewer express his opinion.


Honestly, the DDOS'ers are acting just as childish as the brats in Anonymous.


----------



## _Chaz_ (Mar 13, 2017)

All this because he has a different opinion than others?
Absolutely disgusting.


----------



## Jacklack3 (Mar 13, 2017)

I've been wondering where the man who said GBAtemp did clickbait was gone.


----------



## DarkenedMatter (Mar 13, 2017)

We'll just ignore the fact he purposely gave it a 7/10 to spitefully lower the score knowingly. Nothing better than becoming "relevant" again.


----------



## Skelletonike (Mar 13, 2017)

Eh, don't like the guy and he says a lot of crap. 
People should not be doing that to him however, people are free to like and dislike whatever they want.

Something that SJW's often forget. x'D


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 13, 2017)

People are mad because they feel he had ulterior motives for scoring so low. Its pretty obvious he did, whether its a grudge w/ Nintendo, going against the grain for attention, personal reasons, whatever.. People are pissed because they think he's an ***hole, and ***holes get hacked.


----------



## lonewolf08 (Mar 13, 2017)

I think the Zelda game is good but I also feel like they missed a huge opportunity here. I like that it's harder but I feel like if they had made it co op ala monster hunter where you can team up with other links to fight bigger or harder guardians or dragons or whatever really that is harder it would have made the game so much better. It already has the grind and farming why not go all the way. Coupled with the frame rate drops and without a way to repair weapons and slight repetitive gameplay I would rate it about the same 7-7.5/10. That's just my opinion though and it's not a bad score really.


----------



## Viri (Mar 13, 2017)

Can't stand the asshole, but he has a right to his opinion, and shouldn't be ddosed over it.


----------



## Mystic Shadow (Mar 13, 2017)

Botw 5/10 it's to boring come at me bruh lmao I'd give it an 8/10 for Wii u bc one lag two shrines started getting boring and the story was meh. I finished the game and I was like that's it ok guess I gotta wait for dlc.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 13, 2017)

Deathbot64 said:


> 7/10 isn't even a bad review. Like wtf?



Sonic Boom Fire&Ice got a 7.5 from IGN.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 13, 2017)

Not a fan of Sterling and his whole schtick, otherwise I might have had to give a damn.  All this means is one less bad reviewer online for a little while.


----------



## invaderyoyo (Mar 13, 2017)

Sizednochi said:


> I didn't say the game deserves a 10 per see. But he didn't address performance issues for example. His only complaints were stamina wheel and durability. Going by what he says he should have given it a 8.5 at least. But he gave the right amount needed to get the metacritic score down to 97. He also gave Horizon a 9.5/10. Really makes you think....


Each time there's a complaint it doesn't subtract a set amount from 10, say 0.5 for each complaint. It isn't math. 

It's more like a scale of how much you enjoyed the game. 10 being that you absolutely loved it. 7 means he liked it. People are pissed that he didn't absolutely love the game.

You'd think the guy insulted their mother instead of saying that he liked a game.


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Sonic Boom Fire&Ice got a 7.5 from IGN.



Different site though.

Sterling uses the whole scale (as it should be)

http://www.thejimquisition.com/review-score-guide/

IGN uses the scale most places use of

8-10 Good, great etc.
7 average
7> all shit.

7 is good. An 8 would be great. I don't see an issue with giving it a score of "good".

Not alligning with other sites because they use a 7-10 scale and 7 is average for those is a whole other arguement.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Mar 13, 2017)

Sizednochi said:


> Jim is an asshole. He gave the amount needed to tank the score from 98 to 97. His negative points are durability and stamina wheel. That's it. He praises the game, says it's fantastic but "some flaws hinder it" and that's the two things he /talked about. No way in hell the game should deserve a 7/10 for that. But he did it anyway to fuck with the metacritic score.
> 
> DDOSing is pathetic but he's just as bad as the people doing it.


Not saying he shouldn't have an opinion, but I believe he's done this before with a completely different game from some other company. Not only that, but he has a rather negative view of Nintendo. You know, going as far to say it's ok to pirate their games and whatnot. That's not including how he's responding on twitter regarding the situation, which is only driving the tension here.


----------



## heartgold (Mar 13, 2017)

It's a clickbait review, guy wanted a reaction outta Nintendo fanboys/girls and it's worked. Lol

He can't be taken seriously, he rated a shitty game like fallout 4, 9/10.

Fallout 4 >>> Zelda botw...


----------



## Axido (Mar 13, 2017)

If you intend to fight the establishment, expect the establishment to fight back.

The saddest part is not that there was a reaction to his score, but that probably lots of people (including me) never knew and never intended to know anything about this particular person before this stupid news post on GBAtemp. Thanks for nothing, OP.

Stop clickbaiting!


----------



## Zense (Mar 13, 2017)

It's sad how we gamers are wasting so much of our time discussing a random review of a game instead of actually gaming. I really wish this article didn't get front page publicity, because it just shows me what we've come to. I remember before the internet and aggregate scores were as much a thing as now, but we still enjoyed our games. Maybe we even played more instead of losing time on these trivial matters.

I honestly didn't know about this dude before this so I guess he got pubblicity out of this at least.

On a completely different note though, BoTW has actually sparked a big discussion about game reviews, which I think is good. I have to admit that reviews aren't a waste of time. Almost all the time I check Steam for people's comments on the games, and I give these more credibility than metacritic user scores or even big sites' reviews like ign or gamespot. I've read a couple of articles on how valve is updating their user review system and I hope it's continuing to change in the consumers favor. Steam is great in that it gives you a quick and easy way to see peoples comments and what issues the game has so that you spend the least time possible reading up on reviews before you make a decision to buy.

On the other hand you have Nintendo's eshop reviews which I find highly untrustworthy. I've yet to see a game have less than 4/5 stars there. And you don't even need to have owned the game to review it.

Now that you can register retail cartridges I think they should implement the same system as Steam. Maybe these user comments would be improved if there's like a set time you have to play a game before reviewing it? I know it's difficult to make cuz you have games like pikmin 3 that are done in a sitting and then mmos that never end...

Anyways, this is the type of discussion that should be going on, not whether someone's entitled to their own opinion and to express it, that was already decided on 70 years ago.


----------



## gamesquest1 (Mar 13, 2017)

come'on gbatemp you need to cry ddos too, get all those free clicks 

It genuinely does sound like bullshitty attention seeking, gbatemp gave it a "low" score and i only seen a handful of gripey posts at best, I wonder how much it costs to hire a botnet to ddos yourself


----------



## Originality (Mar 13, 2017)

I'm nearly done with the game (beat main bosses, completed majority of shrines, finally saved up enough rupees to fully upgrade most of my armour, ticking down the last of my quest list) but the one thing that keeps prodding at my enjoyment is the same thing Jim mentioned in his Jimquisition video. I have a lot of powerful weapons filling up my inventory that I don't want to use against the normal trash mobs, because I'd rather save them for "real" fights like mini-bosses and Hyrule Castle. Because even though I've come across something like 5 Great Flameblades, two I ended up throwing away (because I found better) and only one broke from actual combat. The other two I left where I found them.

I hate the durability system. Sure, there's a trainer that I could use for infinite durability, but I don't feel right cheating in a game as "easy" as this one. 

I'll wait until I beat Ganon before deciding on what score I'd give, but so far... there's no way it's getting a perfect score IMHO.


----------



## Arecaidian Fox (Mar 13, 2017)

I'm bummed that it dropped down a point on Metacritic due to his review. Like, way more bummed than I thought I'd be reading that... But I also know a 97 is still fucking amazing and better than most games in the last several years by a long shot. And as much as I consider Breath of the Wild to be the Ocarina of Time killer, even for a Zelda and Nintendo fan like myself, neither game is perfect. BotW is something like a 9.8/10 for me, and that last bit that's missing is my personal irk over the low drop rate for arrows and somewhat grindy late-game resource gathering more than anything else (the frame dips in certain areas don't really bother me or, more importantly, seem to impact the gameplay). BotW, like any other game, is not without flaws, minor as they may be. It's still easily a heavyweight contender for both best game in the series and one of the best games of all time. People need to relax.


----------



## chavosaur (Mar 13, 2017)

gamesquest1 said:


> come'on gbatemp you need to cry ddos too, get all those free clicks
> 
> It genuinely does sound like bullshitty attention seeking, gbatemp gave it a "low" score and i only seen a handful of gripey posts at best, I wonder how much it costs to hire a botnet to ddos yourself





Axido said:


> If you intend to fight the establishment, expect the establishment to fight back.
> 
> The saddest part is not that there was a reaction to his score, but that probably lots of people (including me) never knew and never intended to know anything about this particular person before this stupid news post on GBAtemp. Thanks for nothing, OP.
> 
> Stop clickbaiting!



MAN FINDS TIN FOIL HAT WEARING ALIENS IN HIS THREAD, CLICK HERE TO FIND OUT HOW HE SINGLEHANDEDLY FOUGHT FOR HIS LIFE AND HIS INTEGRITY AND HOW TO INCREASE YOUR E-PEEN BY 17%


----------



## Wander's Hat (Mar 13, 2017)

pporly structured response ahoy. not sorry for it.

First of all, why do people even use Metacritic? Sites like that only make sense if review scores are standardised. The current state of entertainment reviews is that each reviewer, Jim included, has different ways of scoring reviews. That's *not* standardised. Metacritic is basically getting people's review scores, each made differently with different rules, and making some score from that on the reputation & influence of the reviewers? Sheesh, just find a reviewer or hell, even a personality that you feel fits your views on gaming and see what games they do and don't like. You'll have a lot more fun then.

This is admittedly unprofessional of me, but maybe it's my distaste for Nintendo fans as of recent that's got me siding with Jim here. Seriously, they're more religious about Nintendo than Apple fans, who can at least see the faults of Apple in a post-Jobs world.
Now I don't agree with Jim on everything (especially about virtual reality), but damn right I'm gonna defend his ability to use his free speech to criticise a piece of entertainment.
When people have different views on something, that should add discussion and debate - not a fucking denial of service attack and _death threats_ because a guy didn't rate a game 10/10. Bloody hell, we've had enough of that this year already!

*ahem* Seriously, though. I do like how BOTW looks, and I want Kass to plow me so hard I won't sit down for days, but flaws of the game should and must be recognised. You can easily polish a turd.
I'll wait for a friend to get it on Wii U/Switch to see if it's any good.


----------



## duffmmann (Mar 13, 2017)

Wow people are dumb.  The DDOSing people are the dumbest part for sure, but also when it comes to Jim Sterling, I often get the opinion that he does things just to be a contrarian.  Like it feels to me that his 7 rating isn't so much the grade he truly feels it deserves, and is instead just a score that he knows will catch people's attention and get people talking.  Another person giving the game a 9 to 10 is just gonna be lost in the wind, if you go low or even medium for such a game, and people will take notice.  I really do think that there was at least a part of him that took great pleasure in all the attention (and by extension probably more patreon pledgers) that the whole Digital Homicide fiasco brought him.  Now does any of that justify getting DDOSd?  No, of course not, I just feel like a story like this illustrates a lot of dumb behaviors.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 13, 2017)

the whole ddos and "clickbait" things are useless. Jim does not run ads on his site so he doesn't care about getting clicks on his content, or where the content is being read.

he still liked the game, you know? just not as much as other reviewers. 7/10 doesn't mean shit. if that ruins your enjoyment with the game then I think there's something wrong with you.

I did read the review myself and I think it's fair and well written, even if I don't agree with some of the parts like weapon durability (to a point) and the towers. please tell me how he did this to be spiteful of Nintendo/Zelda/whatever.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 13, 2017)

So the nintendrones are now giving a guy death threats just because he gave a 7/10 to their god sent gift?

How sad, how sad and pathetic. When did the nintendo community got so toxic? AAAaah, but let's trash on ps4 and xbox one, we are original and have more exclusives. Daddy nintendo loves us. All hail nintendo.


----------



## duffmmann (Mar 13, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> the whole ddos and "clickbait" things are useless. Jim does not run ads on his site so he doesn't care about getting clicks on his content, or where the content is being read.
> 
> he still liked the game, you know? just not as much as other reviewers. 7/10 doesn't mean shit. if that ruins your enjoyment with the game then I think there's something wrong with you.
> 
> I did read the review myself and I think it's fair and well written, even if I don't agree with some of the parts like weapon durability (to a point) and the towers. please tell me how he did this to be spiteful of Nintendo/Zelda/whatever.



Jim makes money from his patreon supporters.  How does one get more patreon supporters?  By extending their audience.  How does one expand their audience?  You get yourself more attention.  How do you get more attention?  You do something different that makes you stand out in some way.  Giving a game that's getting universal praise a lower review is a great way of standing out in the field, as is getting a developer to sue you over nothing more than the fact that you review and play games online (which obviously wasn't his goal, but I have no doubt that the whole Digital Homicide thing led to him receiving many more Patreon supporters, which could be what made him realize that the more he was out in the zeitgeist, the more money he'd ultimately make).  I could be wrong, but Jim has a certain attitude about himself that has led me to believe that he's not always as genuine about the things he's talking about as he might have you believe.  Again, none of that justifies him getting DDOSd, but I'm also not convinced that the 7 rating he gave the game is truly the rating he feels it deserves.  Frankly I really don't care what he or metacritic gave it, but I am genuinely a little bit skeptical of him and some of the things he says/does.


----------



## CathyRina (Mar 13, 2017)

I find it more outrageous that people gave this game a 10/10 while it suffers from the weapon fragility system and frame rate dips, which are more common in TV mode on the switch.

7/10 is still a good number. I don't get why games nowadays need to have masterpiece worthy scores or else people think they're bad or niche.


----------



## duffmmann (Mar 13, 2017)

XrosBlader821 said:


> I find it more outrageous that people gave this game a 10/10 while it suffers from the weapon fragility system and frame rate dips, which are more common in TV mode on the switch.
> 
> 7/10 is still a good number. I don't get why games nowadays need to have masterpiece worthy scores or else people think they're bad or niche.



Frame drops on the Switch have actually been linked to a wifi issue.  Turn off the Wifi and you should notice next to no more frame drops in the Switch version.  In the meantime, Nintendo is working on a patch to fix this issue.  

Source: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/20..._could_be_why_your_games_keep_dropping_frames

I can verify that after a few hours with the wifi off, I haven't noticed the frame drops like I had so it would seem that is the actual real source of the issue.


----------



## digipimp75 (Mar 13, 2017)

Is it any wonder why gamers are painted as hostile, sad little basement-dwellers?   I'm so sick of these f*****g manbabies and their inability to cope with differing opinions.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Mar 13, 2017)

duffmmann said:


> Frame drops on the Switch have actually been linked to a wifi issue.  Turn off the Wifi and you should notice next to no more frame drops in the Switch version.  In the meantime, Nintendo is working on a patch to fix this issue.
> 
> Source: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/20..._could_be_why_your_games_keep_dropping_frames
> 
> I can verify that after a few hours with the wifi off, I haven't noticed the frame drops like I had so it would seem that is the actual real source of the issue.


Not only that, but Shin'en made a statement that there's a flaw in the firmware that's causing a drain of GPU resources, which for their game results in fluctuating between 900p and 1080p in single-player where it should be a full 1080p.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 13, 2017)

duffmmann said:


> Jim makes money from his patreon supporters.  How does one get more patreon supporters?  By extending their audience.  How does one expand their audience?  You get yourself more attention.  How do you get more attention?  You do something different that makes you stand out in some way.  Giving a game that's getting universal praise a lower review is a great way of standing out in the field, as is getting a developer to sue you over nothing more than the fact that you review and play games online (which obviously wasn't his goal, but I have no doubt that the whole Digital Homicide thing led to him receiving many more Patreon supporters, which could be what made him realize that the more he was out in the zeitgeist, the more money he'd ultimately make).  I could be wrong, but Jim has a certain attitude about himself that has led me to believe that he's not always as genuine about the things he's talking about as he might have you believe.  Again, none of that justifies him getting DDOSd, but I'm also not convinced that the 7 rating he gave the game is truly the rating he feels it deserves.  Frankly I really don't care what he or metacritic gave it, but I am genuinely a little bit skeptical of him and some of the things he says/does.


I've been following Jim for maybe two years now and I do believe he is honest about what he does. more because he's on Patreon so he can say what he wants without some "corporate shadow" over him.

I also don't think he did this just to stand out. Patreon is way different than running ads, people only have to pay if they want. and Jim doesn't do anything special for those who are patrons, so people only donate if they actually like the content.

and I also don't think it was because of Nintendo and their policies. none of that says he can't like their games, so he'd probably still give BoTW a higher score if it didn't have these issues. I think the best example of this is his MGSV: The Phantom Pain review, with a near glowing 9/10 score, despite thinking Konami is one of the worst game developers/publishers out there.


----------



## CathyRina (Mar 13, 2017)

duffmmann said:


> Jim makes money from his patreon supporters.  How does one get more patreon supporters?  By extending their audience.  How does one expand their audience?  You get yourself more attention.  How do you get more attention?  You do something different that makes you stand out in some way.  Giving a game that's getting universal praise a lower review is a great way of standing out in the field, as is getting a developer to sue you over nothing more than the fact that you review and play games online (which obviously wasn't his goal, but I have no doubt that the whole Digital Homicide thing led to him receiving many more Patreon supporters, which could be what made him realize that the more he was out in the zeitgeist, the more money he'd ultimately make).  I could be wrong, but Jim has a certain attitude about himself that has led me to believe that he's not always as genuine about the things he's talking about as he might have you believe.  Again, none of that justifies him getting DDOSd, but I'm also not convinced that the 7 rating he gave the game is truly the rating he feels it deserves.  Frankly I really don't care what he or metacritic gave it, but I am genuinely a little bit skeptical of him and some of the things he says/does.


Why would you pay him patreon money on a review you didn't like? Have you even read the review? He said that he really likes the game except for the weapon durability that kills the joy of combat which is like half of the game.
Similarly why would you pay patreon money when he points his finger at Digital Homoshite when he's already well funded? Not once he asked for extra support on patreon when shit sued him. Not once he linked his patreon account after a "controversial" review. The same thing happened when he gave a much less glowing review to no mans sky a game that the fanbase would kill for and turned out to be boring shit on launch. That's what happening here, he's honest, not shy to give games scores he believes they deserve, that's all.


----------



## dimmidice (Mar 13, 2017)

Haven't played it myself so i can't be certain but it seems incredibly repetitive to me. That along with dumbed down puzzles and smaller dungeons isn't appealing to me. I'm sure it's a fun game but i just can't see why it's deserving of all these 99/100's.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 13, 2017)

The low key click bait jokes make this thread. Let's be honest here.


----------



## Deathbot64 (Mar 13, 2017)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Sonic Boom Fire&Ice got a 7.5 from IGN.


So, those are just one reviewers opinion.


----------



## duffmmann (Mar 13, 2017)

XrosBlader821 said:


> Why would you pay him patreon money on a review you didn't like? Have you even read the review? He said that he really likes the game except for the weapon durability that kills the joy of combat which is like half of the game.
> Similarly why would you pay patreon money when he points his finger at Digital Homoshite when he's already well funded? Not once he asked for extra support on patreon when shit sued him. Not once he linked his patreon account after a "controversial" review. The same thing happened when he gave a much less glowing review to no mans sky a game that the fanbase would kill for and turned out to be boring shit on launch. That's what happening here, he's honest, not shy to give games scores he believes they deserve, that's all.



I wouldn't, but there are plenty of Zelda haters out there.  you look at the user ratings on metacritic for Breath of the Wild?  A whole lot of zeroes from the people that either don't like Nintendo or Zelda or just want to troll.  These are the kinds of people that might be like hey this contrarian thinks like me, I'll support him.  Meanwhile, there are already hundreds of people giving the game a 10 out of 10, if Jim were to give it a high rating that would be just shouting in the wind, no one would notice, and no one would care, he wouldn't get many new patreon supporters from such a rating.  I do honestly believe that by giving it a lower rating it does get him more attention which in turn can turn into more supporters from the kind of people that would go on Metacritic and give the game a low rating on purpose.  I can't say that's his end game or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.  Frankly I don't care, but I've grown to not be so trustworthy in the guy the more that I've watched his videos over the years.  Something about him has always rubbed me the wrong way in terms of his overall attitude, though I really can't quite put my finger on what it is.


----------



## hobbledehoy899 (Mar 13, 2017)

This sort of shit is why more'n'more people are becoming anti-(modern )Nintendo... for the milking of lulz from lol-cow Nintendo fannies.


----------



## CathyRina (Mar 13, 2017)

duffmmann said:


> I wouldn't, but there are plenty of Zelda haters out there.  you look at the user ratings on metacritic for Breath of the Wild?  A whole lot of zeroes from the people that either don't like Nintendo or Zelda or just want to troll.  These are the kinds of people that might be like hey this contrarian thinks like me, I'll support him.  Meanwhile, there are already hundreds of people giving the game a 10 out of 10, if Jim were to give it a high rating that would be just shouting in the wind, no one would notice, and no one would care, he wouldn't get many new patreon supporters from such a rating.  I do honestly believe that by giving it a lower rating it does get him more attention which in turn can turn into more supporters from the kind of people that would go on Metacritic and give the game a low rating on purpose.  I can't say that's his end game or not, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.  Frankly I don't care, but I've grown to not be so trustworthy in the guy the more that I've watched his videos over the years.  Something about him has always rubbed me the wrong way in terms of his overall attitude, though I really can't quite put my finger on what it is.


You overestimate the good will of internet trolls and your suspicions comes purely from not knowing the reviewer.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

Just more evidence that a certain section of Nintendo's fanbase confuses being a fan with absolutely brand loyalty and would stop at nothing to prove that they're autistic. We see it everyday, some people just can't take criticism, as if their favourite game was their baby. They act as if giving the game a fair score is equivalent to shaking their newborn - it's just a video game, chill out.


----------



## duffmmann (Mar 13, 2017)

XrosBlader821 said:


> You overestimate the good will of internet trolls and your suspicions comes purely from not knowing the reviewer.



I know him well enough, been subscribed to him for years.  Like I said, I can't say its his end game or not, but it wouldn't surprise me given how I've always taken the things he says with a grain of salt.  He has always been prone to hyperbole, needlessly harsh on some indie developers, yet very forgiving to others when he has some personal involvement like his voice appearing in their games.  I enjoy his content overall, but I don't fully trust the guy.  That's all I'm really saying.  I absolutely could be wrong about the guy, but he's done nothing to make me feel that I am wrong about him.


----------



## CathyRina (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Just more evidence that a certain section of Nintendo's fanbase confuses being a fan with absolutely brand loyalty and would stop at nothing to prove that they're autistic. We see it everyday, some people just can't take criticism, as if their favourite game was their baby. They act as if giving the game a fair score is equivalent to shaking their newborn - it's just a video game, chill out.


Jim said it best himself "If you love your game so much why don't you just go and play it then? Why do you care so much about the opinion of a stranger that you'd rather spend time Ddos-ing him instead of playing the game"


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

XrosBlader821 said:


> Why would you pay him patreon money on a review you didn't like? Have you even read the review? He said that he really likes the game except for the weapon durability that kills the joy of combat which is like half of the game.
> Similarly why would you pay patreon money when he points his finger at Digital Homoshite when he's already well funded? Not once he asked for extra support on patreon when shit sued him. Not once he linked his patreon account after a "controversial" review. The same thing happened when he gave a much less glowing review to no mans sky a game that the fanbase would kill for and turned out to be boring shit on launch. That's what happening here, he's honest, not shy to give games scores he believes they deserve, that's all.


Dangling Patreon money on a stick like a carrot for a donkey to shake a reviewer down and make sure that he affirms your pre-concieved notion that the game you're looking forward to is the second coming of Christ is incredibly childish. It would be completely dishonest of him to score a title any higher than he believes it should be scored. I personally don't like the guy as an individual, but I'll happily support him when someone's trying to infringe on his God-given right to free speech, because that's what this is - an attempt to silence a review that some people don't like.


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

XrosBlader821 said:


> Jim said it best himself "If you love your game so much why don't you just go and play it then? Why do you care so much about the opinion of a stranger that you'd rather spend time Ddos-ing him instead of playing the game"



Fanboys.

Need the 98, highest ever game etc to bash fans of other consoles with.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Mar 13, 2017)

Never played the game, but I'm going to rate it 0/100,  because I'm sick  of everyone jacking off over it.


----------



## gamesquest1 (Mar 13, 2017)

I'm feeling the whole thing is bs, pretty much everyone I have seen have said it's very good, but not 10/10, and I'm sure people might grumble at a 7/10 score (personally I would also rate it at about 7/10) but I genuinely don't see anyone bothering to ddos over it

I would imagine gbatemp would have a fair amount of die hard Nintendo fanboys and even here I haven't seen more than 1/2 people acting butt hurt over low(ish) reviews (compared to what they were personally expecting)

so sure while there are people who dislike Nintendo giving really low scores without ever playing, I'm sure there is probably other people who simply don't like this guy who would also be looking for excuses to try cause drama, but then a lot of YouTube "personalities" thrive this kinda crap to grow their channel and garner supporters to the point where I'm sure a lot of it is grossly exaggerated or even made up


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 13, 2017)

Nintendo fan boys aside, when you make your way in life by bashing other's creativity, instead of creating your own work, you can expect and deserve this kind of backlash. After all, you are the one who purposely created the negativity. Why did the reviewer on gbatemp who scored it a 7/10 not get the same back lash? 1)People probably have respect for that person and 2)That person probably does not have a history of bashing games for profit.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

gamesquest1 said:


> I'm feeling the whole thing is bs, pretty much everyone I have seen have said it's very good, but not 10/10, and I'm sure people might grumble at a 7/10 score (personally I would also rate it at about 7/10) but I genuinely don't see anyone bothering to ddos over it
> 
> I would imagine gbatemp would have a fair amount of die hard Nintendo fanboys and even here I haven't seen more than 1/2 people acting butt hurt over low(ish) reviews (compared to what they were personally expecting)
> 
> so sure while there are people who dislike Nintendo giving really low scores without ever playing, I'm sure there is probably other people who simply don't like this guy who would also be looking for excuses to try cause drama, but then a lot of YouTube "personalities" thrive this kinda crap to grow their channel and garner supporters to the point where I'm sure a lot of it is grossly exaggerated or even made up


You haven't read our review of it, have you? There's so much butt-blasting going on that the whole comment section should be covered in Asshurtprazol cream just to be safe. It's insane 7/10 is a decent score, I really don't get it either.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 13, 2017)

He probably shouldn't have been DDOS'd, but I can understand both sides of this little quarrel.  Reviewers need to be honest with themselves and their audience, else they're no better than professional trolls.  Sterling certainly hasn't done himself any favors over the years by constantly ragging on Nintendo and showing favoritism toward the other two major console manufacturers.  Removes his impartiality in the eyes of many, and thus also removes much of his credibility as a result.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

Xzi said:


> He probably shouldn't have been DDOS'd, but I can understand both sides of this little quarrel.  Reviewers need to be honest with themselves and their audience, else they're no better than professional trolls.  Sterling certainly hasn't done himself any favors over the years by constantly ragging on Nintendo and showing favoritism toward the other two major console manufacturers.  Removes his impartiality in the eyes of many, and thus also removes much of his credibility as a result.


Maybe he wouldn't be so hard on Nintendo if they started releasing competently made products again, like they used to.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Maybe he wouldn't be so hard on Nintendo if they started releasing competently made products again, like they used to.


Certainly their competence is at least on the level of MS and Sony.  The problem is judging Nintendo products on a completely separate and more heavily-weighted scale.  Pirating most Xbox and Playstation games is just as easy, so Sterling encouraging the piracy of Nintendo games only is stupid.


----------



## Online (Mar 13, 2017)

I seen scores for games drop more numbers for much less. 7 is a bit low of a score but at least he it was with a honest critique of the game mechanic and finished the game. Even though Jim rated some of my most favourite games with 6.5's and lower, i trust him more than I trust ign


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 13, 2017)

It's amazing how these little kids can't even handle even the smallest of amount of criticism. What a group of losers.


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 13, 2017)

I just hope Sterling reviews documentaries. 

https://gbatemp.net/threads/nintend...e-wild-documentary-the-making-of-botw.464438/


----------



## Veho (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> It's insane 7/10 is a decent score, I really don't get it either.


It should be a decent score, but people (both readers and reviewers) are equating the scale with the percentage scale used for (American) school grades, where 70% is a low C or a high D, which is not a good grade. So 7/10 has come to mean "barely worth playing" and is seldom used, and the entire scale of 1 to 10 has become crammed in between the 8 and the 10, and we have scores with decimal places which is fucking ridiculous. Not to mention that any review worth reading can't be boiled down to a single number but hey, reading is hard.


----------



## WhiteMaze (Mar 13, 2017)

Arras said:


> Yeah, it's shit. But given how influential this guy is, how many insane fans there are and the ease of doing something like this, it's somewhat inevitable. I'm sure there are many more people who would respectfully disagree, but those aren't nearly as vocal/newsworthy.



Everyone has an opinion. Fanboys just don't respect that, and it's a sad thing.


----------



## tbb043 (Mar 13, 2017)

chavosaur said:


> No one should be silenced for their opinion as everyone has a right to their views.



They should when they clearly were just being a troll, not just having a (bad) opinion. Turnabout is fair play.


----------



## Bonestorm (Mar 13, 2017)

Subtle Demise said:


> Never played the game, but I'm going to rate it 0/100,  because I'm sick  of everyone jacking off over it.


that's exactly why he gave it a 7/10


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 13, 2017)

Xzi said:


> He probably shouldn't have been DDOS'd, but I can understand both sides of this little quarrel.  Reviewers need to be honest with themselves and their audience, else they're no better than professional trolls.  Sterling certainly hasn't done himself any favors over the years by constantly ragging on Nintendo and showing favoritism toward the other two major console manufacturers.  Removes his impartiality in the eyes of many, and thus also removes much of his credibility as a result.


Do you even watch his videos? He rags on them for perfectly good reasons. He brings up the actual issues behind Nintendo and talks about those issues, instead of bowing before every fart they make. 
This review is no different from his others. Everyone is giving the game a 10/10 without even once touching on a single issue the game has. Everyone is up this game's ass like it revolutionized gaming. If anything, most of the reviews for this game seem more like advertisements than actual reviews. There have been so few reviewers actually trying to give this game a review. And when they give an different score it's "clickbait" and or they are attacked for not giving into the 10/10 cult.


----------



## call me Ken or Accel (Mar 13, 2017)

Annndddd stamped Nintendo fans as "toxic" in my notebook

I see Jim Sterling as a "hero" in the video games review industry. He doesnt afraid to be honest with himself and to everyone else
Never be afraid of angry nerd with digital pitch forks and digital torches


----------



## Xzi (Mar 13, 2017)

Crystal the Glaceon said:


> Do you even watch his videos? He rags on them for perfectly good reasons. He brings up the actual issues behind Nintendo and talks about those issues, instead of bowing before every fart they make.
> This review is no different from his others. Everyone is giving the game a 10/10 without even once touching on a single issue the game has. Everyone is up this game's ass like it revolutionized gaming. If anything, most of the reviews for this game seem more like advertisements than actual reviews. There have been so few reviewers actually trying to give this game a review. And when they give an different score it's "clickbait" and or they are attacked for not giving into the 10/10 cult.


I don't watch his videos, no.  As I mentioned earlier in the thread I don't like his personality or the schtick he does.  As far as I can tell, he's set himself up as a troll/joke reviewer from the beginning, so he probably shouldn't be all that surprised when people don't take him seriously or he gets trolled right back.

7/10 is fair depending on subjective opinion, the bigger issue here is that it's impossible to know if he was being honest by labeling the game with that number or if he had other motivations for it (back to the troll/joke thing).


----------



## p1ngpong (Mar 13, 2017)

Not surprised that people would stoop so low as to DDoS Jim Sterling and try to hijack his social media, the ultra Nintendo hardcore "fans" are literal cult members. Close minded, stupid, anti gaming, anti anything that slights Nintendo in the mildest of ways. I know them all to well, I have had to deal with that sort of crowd here on many occasions. I remember one time I posted a news article just before the Wii U was released that a lot of devs thought the Wii U was significantly underpowered. The backlash against me was both hilarious and disgusting, it was ironic that the news piece was firmly grounded in truth.

Nintendo fanboys are the worst and the Zelda zealots are the cream of that shit heap. Dealing with those sort of people for so many years has played a significant part in me losing my love for and being apathetic towards Nintendo.

I genuinely hate these sort of people. Go die in a fire if a review score offends your delicate sensibilities.


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

p1ngpong said:


> Not surprised that people would stoop so low as to DDoS Jim Sterling and try to hijack his social media, the ultra Nintendo hardcore "fans" are literal cult members. Close minded, stupid, anti gaming, anti anything that slights Nintendo in the mildest of ways. I know them all to well, I have had to deal with that sort of crowd here on many occasions. I remember one time I posted a news article just before the Wii U was released that a lot of devs thought the Wii U was significantly underpowered. The backlash against me was both hilarious and disgusting, it was ironic that the news piece was firmly grounded in truth.
> 
> Nintendo fanboys are the worst and the Zelda zealots are the cream of that shit heap. Dealing with those sort of people for so many years has played a significant part in me losing my love for and being apathetic towards Nintendo.
> 
> I genuinely hate these sort of people. Go die in a fire if a review score offends your delicate sensibilities.




Don't hold back, tell us how you really feel about them


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 13, 2017)

p1ngpong said:


> Not surprised that people would stoop so low as to DDoS Jim Sterling and try to hijack his social media, the ultra Nintendo hardcore "fans" are literal cult members. Close minded, stupid, anti gaming, anti anything that slights Nintendo in the mildest of ways. I know them all to well, I have had to deal with that sort of crowd here on many occasions. I remember one time I posted a news article just before the Wii U was released that a lot of devs thought the Wii U was significantly underpowered. The backlash against me was both hilarious and disgusting, it was ironic that the news piece was firmly grounded in truth.
> 
> Nintendo fanboys are the worst and the Zelda zealots are the cream of that shit heap. Dealing with those sort of people for so many years has played a significant part in me losing my love for and being apathetic towards Nintendo.
> 
> I genuinely hate these sort of people. Go die in a fire if a review score offends your delicate sensibilities.



Come on now, this has nothing to do with Nintendo fans. Its a human trait. People get like this with anything they are passionate about, especially when they are trying to remain blindly loyal. Point is, this happens with all kinds of things in life, not just Nintendo fans.


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 13, 2017)

Xzi said:


> I don't watch his videos, no.  As I mentioned earlier in the thread I don't like his personality or the schtick he does.  As far as I can tell, he's set himself up as a troll/joke reviewer from the beginning, so he probably shouldn't be all that surprised when people don't take him seriously or he gets trolled right back.
> 
> 7/10 is fair depending on subjective opinion, the bigger issue here is that it's impossible to know if he was being honest by labeling the game with that number or if he had other motivations for it (back to the troll/joke thing).


If you actually knew anything about him, this wouldn't be a question.
He's known to really mix both, but still keep with his honest thoughts on an issue. If he was intending to ruffle feathers, he would have given the review a much lower score. Instead he simply gave the game a decent rating.


----------



## smilodon (Mar 13, 2017)

Fanboys are dumb, clickbait is dumb, metacritic is dumb and water is wet.

There, 7 pages in one sentence.


----------



## ThisIsMyDogKyle (Mar 13, 2017)

Someone gives it a 7/10 that's fine, it's their opinion, I can even see how the game isn't for everyone and someone might give it that. however, when that same person gave Fallout 4 a 9.5, Skyrim a 10, Watch Dogs 2 a 9, has repeatedly let people know how much he hates Nintendo even recently telling people to pirate their games, and even got some stuff objectively wrong in the review ("you have to remember the shrine locations or you won't find them again" is laughably dumb when the game gives a you a large number of options to keep track of shrines), I'm kinda gonna doubt just how valid of a reviewer you are. I really don't get the people getting upset though, like, just ignore him and move on?


----------



## conradcervantes (Mar 13, 2017)

The guy loves making videos about how much of a target he is for publishers and overzealous fans alike, so this should keep his Patreon well-stuffed for the time being.


----------



## Naridar (Mar 13, 2017)

Sterling's review is trolling and attention-wh*ring, a sick desire to steal the spotlight, nonchalantly and maliciously spitting on a developer team's long years of work just for his umpteenth 15 minutes of fame. Nintendo deserves honest opinion for their effort and this vulture of a journalist only has himself to blame for every DDoS and threatening letter coming his way. I'm honestly surprised (and slightly appalled) nobody has tried to bash his mug in in real life so far.

Additionally, review aggregate sites would be more accurate by disregarding the top and bottom 10% of scores, neutralizing and discouraging trolls like him.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

Veho said:


> It should be a decent score, but people (both readers and reviewers) are equating the scale with the percentage scale used for (American) school grades, where 70% is a low C or a high D, which is not a good grade. So 7/10 has come to mean "barely worth playing" and is seldom used, and the entire scale of 1 to 10 has become crammed in between the 8 and the 10, and we have scores with decimal places which is fucking ridiculous. Not to mention that any review worth reading can't be boiled down to a single number but hey, reading is hard.


I firmly believe that the very idea of a numerical score is stupid, decimal points or not - you can't boil an experience down to a number. A simple "yay" and "nay", play it or avoid it kind of a conclusion would be entirely sufficient, the rest is covered by the text and boiled down in the pros and cons. You don't need the number at all, it exists solely to power aggregation sites like Metacritic.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 13, 2017)

ThisIsMyDogKyle said:


> Someone gives it a 7/10 that's fine, it's their opinion, I can even see how the game isn't for everyone and someone might give it that. however, when that same person gave Fallout 4 a 9.5, Skyrim a 10, Watch Dogs 2 a 9, has repeatedly let people know how much he hates Nintendo even recently telling people to pirate their games, and even got some stuff objectively wrong in the review ("you have to remember the shrine locations or you won't find them again" is laughably dumb when the game gives a you a large number of options to keep track of shrines), I'm kinda gonna doubt just how valid of a reviewer you are. I really don't get the people getting upset though, like, just ignore him and move on?


See that's what really irks me.  If BotW is a 7, modless (vanilla) FO4 and Skyrim are a 5.5 or a 6 at best.  If you freely hand out 10s to bug-ridden games with next to no difficulty, then BotW clearly deserves a 10, being mostly bug-free and a decent challenge.  A reviewer with no baseline and no personal standard scale for scoring is useless.  If the reviewer doesn't know what a 1 or a 10 means to them, how is the reader supposed to know?


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

Xzi said:


> Certainly their competence is at least on the level of MS and Sony.  The problem is judging Nintendo products on a completely separate and more heavily-weighted scale.  Pirating most Xbox and Playstation games is just as easy, so Sterling encouraging the piracy of Nintendo games only is stupid.


The quality of Nintendo products fell off a cliff since the GBA/GC, and it's been on a steady decline. Don't get me wrong, as you know, I had high hopes for the Switch, but the bitter reality is slowly outweighing the optimism. I honestly believe that the system should've been released in Autumn with all the kinks worked out and a proper launch library, not five physical games, only one of which being a noteworthy AAA title.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> The quality of Nintendo products fell off a cliff since the GBA/GC, and it's been on a steady decline. Don't get me wrong, as you know, I had high hopes for the Switch, but the bitter reality is slowly outweighing the optimism. I honestly believe that the system should've been released in Autumn with all the kinks worked out and a proper launch library, not five physical games, only one of which being a noteworthy AAA title.


There's no guarantee the system would have any fewer kinks just by releasing later, not that it has any fatal flaws anyway.  No guarantee they could have had a lot more games prepared for it, either.  We've been over this already though, the 3DS release schedule worked out far better for Nintendo in the long run, and so of course they're going to repeat lessons learned from that rather than following the Wii U route.


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> The quality of Nintendo products fell off a cliff since the GBA/GC, and it's been on a steady decline. Don't get me wrong, as you know, I had high hopes for the Switch, but the bitter reality is slowly outweighing the optimism. I honestly believe that the system should've been released in Autumn with all the kinks worked out and a proper launch library, not five physical games, only one of which being a noteworthy AAA title.


I always feel like people's idea of quality with Nintendo is purely based on specs.


----------



## Veho (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> You don't need the number at all, it exists solely to power aggregation sites like Metacritic.


Rotten Tomatoes has a percentage rating calculated solely off of "yay" and "nay" scores. There's no stopping aggregate sites.


----------



## YugamiSekai (Mar 13, 2017)

I'm with the attackers on this one.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 13, 2017)

kprovost7314 said:


> I'm with the attackers on this one.


so rude

so pathetic


----------



## YugamiSekai (Mar 13, 2017)

DespyCL said:


> so rude
> 
> so pathetic


my life in two sentences


----------



## donaldgx (Mar 13, 2017)

first time i read about this "pro reviewer" guy,
Wonder how many thousands will not buy BoTW now that this "pro reviewer" gave it a low score


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 13, 2017)

donaldgx said:


> first time i read about this "pro reviewer" guy,
> Wonder how many thousands will not buy BoTW now that this "pro reviewer" gave it a low score


I pirated it. 


Fite me.


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 13, 2017)

DespyCL said:


> so rude
> 
> so pathetic



14 year olds in a nutshell


----------



## DarkCoffe64 (Mar 13, 2017)

Seems like humanity has forgot that you can ignore things.



Yeah, you can do that instead of getting "triggered", like young'uns say today. Amazing, isn't?


----------



## Armadillo (Mar 13, 2017)

I can't ignore things .

I already bought the game, unfortunately it has to go in the bin now. A 97 shall not be part of my collection


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 13, 2017)

Sizednochi said:


> Jim is an asshole. He gave the amount needed to tank the score from 98 to 97. His negative points are durability and stamina wheel. That's it. He praises the game, says it's fantastic but "some flaws hinder it" and that's the two things he /talked about. No way in hell the game should deserve a 7/10 for that. But he did it anyway to fuck with the metacritic score.
> 
> DDOSing is pathetic but he's just as bad as the people doing it.


First thing is first, Jim (and most Youtubers like him) use a median=average scoring system meaning 5/10 is average, 10/10 is a perfect game, etc. so going off on him for his score vs "Professional" reviewers' scores isn't exactly fair on him.

Even then, I'd say Jim went easy on the game. there's far more that's just outright mechanically broken about the game than what he listed. for example, some of the towers are just nigh impossible to reach (one in the middle of water surrounded by electric enemies comes to mind), there's the problem of poorly communicated or just poorly designed game mechanics, progression isn't exactly signposted well, the game was very obviously designed without the glider and climbing mechanics in mind (you can very easily miss key story events and mandatory progression items like the fireproof armor by gliding/climbing too much), horses can easily get trapped half way up/down ledges (RIP Blaze the Horse, forever trapped on a ledge ;,-<) and likely far more that I have not discovered in my 15-hour attempt at beating the game proper (2/4 Vah completed, 28 temples, etc).

Edit: Oh! I forgot, it's also royally dicks with the rest of the Zelda timeline, ostensibly being placed sometime after Twilight Princess (and possibly Four Swords), it goes out of it's way to not only royal screw over the importance they had to Adult Era to "Have" them in the Child Era and the Zora they evolved from at the same time, but also outright turned them into the previously de-canonized Watarara (Previously from the Vis Manga) in everything but name! so anyone who's been closely following the cannon (Like myself) gets a big fat pole-slap to the face, and anyone who had a honest to goodness moment of sadness for the Zora's loss in the Adult Era is betrayed by their unexplained emergence in the Child Era.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> I always feel like people's idea of quality with Nintendo is purely based on specs.


That's one part of it - the specs need to be adequate in order to support contemporary software, and they haven't met that requirement for a long time now. Due to a strong reliance on third-party games, consoles should be made to play the software, not the other way around - there's only so much you can do through optimisation. Build quality has decreased significantly as well - back in GBA times I knew I could hurl my Game Boy at a wall and it'd be the wall that'd get damaged. Immediately after that Nintendo released the DS with hinges that'd crack if you breathed at them wrong, and not much has changed since then. It's the overall package that declined in quality. Nintendo's been comfortably ridin' on the back of their bestseller IP's, but as the Wii U has proved, even those aren't enough anymore. They need more, and unless they catch up with the rest of the industry, they're never going to climb back to the top. I wish them well, but they really need to get it together.


----------



## Sheimi (Mar 13, 2017)

97/100 too much grass


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 13, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> That's one part of it - the specs need to be adequate in order to support contemporary software, and they haven't met that requirement for a long time now. Due to a strong reliance on third-party games, consoles should be made to play the software, not the other way around - there's only so much you can do through optimisation. Build quality has decreased significantly as well - back in GBA times I knew I could hurl my Game Boy at a wall and the wall would be the thing that gets damaged. Immediately after that Nintendo released the DS with hinges that'd crack if you breathed on them wrong, and not much has changed since then. It's the overall package that declined, Nintendo's been comfortably ridin' on the back of their bestseller IP's, but as the Wii U has proved, even those aren't enough anymore.



Eh, sorry but plenty of holes in your reasoning. The Wii U was really the only console w/ 3rd party support issues.The Wii had tons of 3rd party support and the Switch already has plenty of big name developers on board.

In terms of hardware, the Switch is about on par with Xbox One (Switch 1 TF, Xbox One 1.3 TF), not much difference that can easily be optimized. The Wii U by comparison was .36 TF going up against the Xbox One and PS4, of course that was impossible.

I have had a few DS and never had the hinge problem, but I guess that's why they eventually made the 2DS for ̶k̶i̶d̶s̶ people hard on their consoles. No hinges, no problems.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 13, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> Eh, sorry but plenty of holes in your reasoning. The Wii U was really the only console w/ 3rd party support issues.The Wii had tons of 3rd party support and the Switch already has plenty of big name developers on board.
> 
> In terms of hardware, the Switch is about on par with Xbox One (Switch 1 TF, Xbox One 1.3 TF), not much difference that can easily be optimized. The Wii U by comparison was .36 TF going up against the Xbox One and PS4, of course that was impossible.
> 
> I have had a few DS and never had the hinge problem, but I guess that's why they eventually made the 2DS for ̶k̶i̶d̶s̶ people hard on their consoles. No hinges, no problems.


It still underpowered, there are no big AAA third party games coming to it. Devs will start to rush their ports and blame the console for the bad perfomance and bum, you got the wii u 2.0


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 13, 2017)

DespyCL said:


> It still underpowered, there are no (Exclusive) big AAA games coming to it. Devs will start to rush their ports and blame the console for the bad perfomance and bum, you got the wii u 2.0


FTFY


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 13, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> Eh, sorry but plenty of holes in your reasoning. The Wii U was really the only console w/ 3rd party support issues.The Wii had tons of 3rd party support and the Switch already has plenty of big name developers on board.
> 
> In terms of hardware, the Switch is about on par with Xbox One (Switch 1 TF, Xbox One 1.3 TF), not much difference that can easily be optimized. The Wii U by comparison was .36 TF going up against the Xbox One and PS4, of course that was impossible.
> 
> I have had a few DS and never had the hinge problem, but I guess that's why they eventually made the 2DS for ̶k̶i̶d̶s̶ people hard on their consoles. No hinges, no problems.


It's your reasoning that has holes, not mine. The Wii received a lot of third party content because it was a low-cost entry device in terms of motion controls - it's a 100-million-unit-selling dust collector. AAA content flew right over Wii owner's heads because the platform couldn't support it - what they got instead was a paltry selection of watered down ports and shovelware. You essentially had to own two systems in order to enjoy both Nintendo content *and* third-party blockbusters like Mass Effect, Skyrim or Battlefield, that's just the way it was, and that's hardly a good deal for customers. The Wii's success is easily one of the core reasons why the Wii U failed - customers got burned and didn't want to get burned twice. Nintendo succeeded in marketing, but still ultimately failed at delivering an all-encompassing device. The same can be said about build quality - perhaps you weren't affected, but many users were. It's indisputable that contemporary Nintendo systems are more flimsy than their predecessors. As for the Switch, there's a 300GFLOPs difference between 1TFLOP and 1.3TFLOPs, that's significant. That's almost a Wii U's worth of a gap. You're also not accounting for undocked mode - games have to effectively be playable at half of the total processing power, which equals 500GFLOPs. I'd like to remind you that both the XBO and the PS4 are already sweating bullets trying to run games at 1080p and 30FPS, what chances does the Switch have to do the same thing with significantly less resources? I'm not a doomsayer, I'm just looking at numbers, and the numbers are not favourable.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 13, 2017)

Thelucario21 said:


> FTFY


Neat.

But being realistic, mario oddysey looks promising. Sadly is the only first party game that looks promising. No, i'm not counting xenoblade 2 since it is being developed by a second party studio. Splatoon 2 you say? Pfft, looks almost the same as the wii u one and yet people shit on cod for being the same.

B-but mah fire emblem warriors... EW, another dynasty warriors resking. Disgusting.


----------



## DarthDub (Mar 13, 2017)

Why do weapons break so EASILY? Realistic physics? Almost.


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 13, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> Eh, sorry but plenty of holes in your reasoning. The Wii U was really the only console w/ 3rd party support issues.The Wii had tons of 3rd party support and the Switch already has plenty of big name developers on board.


They said they were on board for the wii u as well ( http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...he-collapse-of-the-unprecedented-relationship for one example) so I am at I will believe it when I see it.

Also the wii had loads of support, save for the last 3 or so years of its life where desert would be too kind... hard vacuum maybe.
The 3ds bled loads of developers that had done fine things on the GBA and DS.
The N64 is considered the epitome of this (Sony's massive push on the PS1 quite literally being to woo developers). Also because Foxi4 and I can't get enough I do have to launch the N64 was a failure thing again. If you are American, have a fanboy streak and squint it might have sort of just about did acceptably but everywhere else it was flop city.
The GC was not lauded at the time, though looking back it would be the last vaguely acceptable library Nintendo got on a home console.

NES, SNES, GBA, DS. All great, all great largely thanks to third parties.


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> It's your reasoning that has holes, not mine. The Wii received a lot of third party content because it was a low-cost entry device in terms of motion controls - it's a 100-million-unit-selling dust collector. AAA content flew right over Wii owner's heads because the platform couldn't support it - what they got instead was a paltry selection of watered down ports and shovelware. You essentially had to own two systems in order to enjoy both Nintendo content *and* third-party blockbusters like Mass Effect, Skyrim or Battlefield, that's just the way it was, and that's hardly a good deal for customers. The Wii's success is easily one of the core reasons why the Wii U failed - customers got burned and didn't want to get burned twice. Nintendo succeeded in marketing, but still ultimately failed at delivering an all-encompassing device. The same can be said about build quality - perhaps you weren't affected, but many users were - it's indisputable that contemporary Nintendo systems are more flimsy than their predecessors. As for the Switch, there's a 300GFLOPs difference between 1TFLOPs and 1.3TFLOPs, that's significant. That's almost a Wii U's worth of a gap. You're also not accounting for undocked mode - games have to effectively be playable at half of the total processing power, which equals 500GFLOPs. I'd like to remind you that both the XBO and the PS4 are already sweating bullets trying to run games at 1080p and 30FPS, what chances does the Switch have to do the same thing with significantly less resources? I'm not a doomsayer, I'm just looking at numbers, and the numbers are not favourable.


I seriously doubt that overall performance will be hit 50%, running at lower speeds does not necessarily equate literally to overall performance. The performance will ultimately be less, but you could compare this to a PC game running at "high" quality settings (docked mode) vs "medium" (portable mode). 

Look at the PS4 vs Xbox one in terms of TF difference and you'll see that .3 TF is not much at all. Plus the Xbox One uses 10% of its GPU power for the OS, so what you're really left with is about 1.1 TF.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 14, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> I seriously doubt that overall performance will be hit 50%, running at lower speeds does not necessarily equate literally to overall performance. The performance will ultimately be less, but you could compare this to a PC game running at "high" quality settings (docked mode) vs "medium" (portable mode).
> 
> Look at the PS4 vs Xbox one in terms of TF difference and you'll see that .3 TF is not much at all. Plus the Xbox One uses 10% of its GPU power for the OS, so what you're really left with is about 1.1 TF.


That difference is exactly why the XBO can't hit 60FPS in the same games the PS4 can.


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> That difference is exactly why the XBO can't hit 60FPS in the same games the PS4 can.


So do you think developers will cave and only produce for PS4, or more likely the other way around? 

Not meaning to say they wont produce for PS4, of course they will, but mean to say games cross platforms will be made to run on the lower specs vs visa versa.


----------



## jahrs (Mar 14, 2017)

While i agree that 7/10 is to low i also say 10/10 is too high cause no game is perfect there will always be something or a collection of things regardless of how small or insignificant it is to some people. 

This is the first zelda game ive actually played and 4 days in i like it but there are some annoyances.... Although i wont go into it im not a "pro reviewer" just some guy whos played lots of games over his life. No game ive played deserves a 10/10 from the original mario to the newest CoD or even fallout. Maybe in the future when games auto adapt to the player using some sorta of ai that sets the difficulty equal to whatever the individual feels is good and or self corrects glitches and annoyances. Then that game can get a 10/10 if the gameplay is good. But for now from what ive seen, heard and experienced this game is the super mario galaxy 2 of the zelda series and i hope there will be a sequel.

Or DLC this is the one game i would pay for more of.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 14, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> So do you think developers will cave and only produce for PS4, or more likely the other way around?


They are still producing more for the ps4... Just look at some of the ps4 ports for switch, they had to cut stuff out or use ps3 assets to make the game "playable" on both docked and undocked mode.

Can't wait to see how ugly skyrim will look.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 14, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> So do you think developers will cave and only produce for PS4, or more likely the other way around?


You seem to think that I want some kind of a monster machine - I don't, I just want an adequate one. If I wanted a monster, I would build a beastly PC - I can certainly afford to do that, I just can't be bothered as my consoles fulfil all my gaming needs. The XBO appears to be adequate, but it goes without saying that XBO versions of multiplats are by and large the inferior versions, which is why I own one only to play exclusive content.  I also own the Switch and the Wii U for the exact same reason. That doesn't change the fact that most users own one gaming machine - they're not like you and me. Consoles need to meet a certain par, and it's yet to be decided whether the Switch does meet it. 1TFLOP undocked would fill me with much more confidence. Then there's the issue of RAM - the competition has 8GB, the Switch only half of that. These are all legitimate concerns about the system, I don't know why you find my opinion questionable.


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 14, 2017)

Jim is an idiot but he's totally entitled to his opinion. 
Shit always seems to happen to him though. At least this time it was just a DDOS and not a lawsuit.


----------



## Mr Objection (Mar 14, 2017)

He gave a 7 to zelda botw because he wanted fame, and know he has it (in a not very good way). Or maybe he is just a honest critic.


----------



## Benja81 (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> You seem to think that I want some kind of a monster machine - I don't, I just want an adequate one. If I wanted a monster, I would build a beastly PC - I can certainly afford to do that, I just can't be bothered as my consoles fulfil all my gaming needs. The XBO appears to be adequate, but it goes without saying that XBO versions of multiplats are by and large the inferior versions, which is why I own one only to play exclusive content.  I also own the Switch and the Wii U for the exact same reason. That doesn't change the fact that most users own one gaming machine - they're not like you and me. Consoles need to meet a certain par, and it's yet to be decided whether the Switch does meet it. 1TFLOP undocked would fill me with much more confidence. Then there's the issue of RAM - the competition has 8GB, the Switch only half of that. These are all legitimate concerns about the system, I don't know why you find my opinion questionable.


Not much I can say about the RAM, that could be an issue I guess.

Maybe they'll release an expansion pack.


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 14, 2017)

Mr Objection said:


> He gave a 7 to zelda botw because he wanted fame, and know he has it (in a not very good way).


He's an Internet celebrity, he doesn't need any more fame, or infamy, depending on how you look at it. Perhaps the fact that he already has it enabled him to be honest rather than attempt to appeal to people's sensibilities by gushing over a beloved franchise for no reason.


----------



## Mr Objection (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> He's an Internet celebrity, he doesn't need any more fame, or infamy, depending on how you look at it.


Celebrities always do stupid things to be spotted by the camera, you know how they are. He wanted more fame and now he is having it, he is the guy being insulted and threatened by a low score. A lot of people who never heard about him are now aware of his existence. Or he said what he think and people who isn't very happy with his opinion are getting mad (saying you will kill someone for a score is just stupid).


----------



## Gourmet (Mar 14, 2017)

I have to commend this guy for doing his job right. 150k views for a video saying he can't deal with durability. Even more views on the review. 160+ replies on GBATemp for something that could be true or not. A true genius.


----------



## codezer0 (Mar 14, 2017)

I don't hold any Zelda fanboys above this kind of stupidity. I've seen this kind of arrogance from the fan-base time, and time again. I've had one try to insist something was wrong with me because I happen to like Nintendo systems and hardware, but not the Zelda franchise... not even bothering to take into account the myriad of other games that are on Nintendo systems that I do enjoy.

But no, because _I_ don't see the appeal or find Zelda games enjoyable, *I'm* the one that has some deep seated mental issues.  How _dare __anyone_ speak out against their beloved Link, and the almighty Shigeru Miyamoto. It's somehow second only to the likes of the fanbases that encouraged people to commit murders and suicides because they didn't get their desired outcome.


DarkenedMatter said:


> Yeah, I understand. It's just that I never really cared or knew who he was until this. He just seems like a twat in general. He puts off a holier than thou vibe but idk.


That's Jim Sterling's schtick, or character, as it were. Guy is pretty chill in person. But he does get on it when people are making stupid decisions.

I blame how publishers have tied salary expectations and contractual bonuses to Metacritic scores for causing some indies to flat out try to abuse copyright/trademark and discussion boards to try and quell negative criticisms, which only seem to bolster critics like Jim. The hap-hazard nature which Digital Homicide tried to have him sued and arrested, and most recently again by STICLI games, only goes to prove that a lot of these publishers and developers aren't above trying to use shady tactics to  hide the fact that their games aren't that good. It's because Shadow of Mordor used some of these same shady tactics that more or less tarnished what ended up actually being a good game at the end.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 14, 2017)

Mr Objection said:


> Celebrities always do stupid things to be spotted by the camera, you know how they are. He wanted more fame and now he is having it, he is the guy being insulted and threatened by a low score. A lot of people who enver heard about him are now aware of his existence.


And how are you so syre about this? You got any evidence? Did you ask him about it? Are you his brother? no? That's what i thought.

You seem to be on the same boat of hating him because he gave zelda an still decent score. Come on, this why we humans are still a bunch of shits, learn to tolerate a different opinion. Not because it is different than yours you are entitled to shit on him.


----------



## Mr Objection (Mar 14, 2017)

Gourmet said:


> I have to commend this guy for doing his job right. 150k views for a video saying he can't deal with durability. Even more views on the review. 160+ replies on GBATemp for something that could be true or not. A true genius.


That is why I am saying, we are giving he fame for something that could be true or false. He could be behind all this, or it is true, but he gave the low score to make fans angry. Very smarth indeed. Or his review is honest and real and people is a shit and are being a dick with someone who haven't made nothing wrong.



DespyCL said:


> And how are you so syre about this? You got any evidence? Did you ask him about it? Are you his brother? no? That's what i thought.
> 
> You seem to be on the same boat of hating him because he gave zelda an still decent score. Come on, this why we humans are still a bunch of shits, learn to tolerate a different opinion. Not because it is different than yours you are entitled to shit on him.




People love fame, maybe his score is real, but I am looking a lto but a lot of sites talking about him, I saw this all day with famous people. His review might be true or no, we don't know, do you? The thing is that people will make everything for a bit of fame, everything (I know about worst things that a bad score) sometimes those things are true or false, we can't know. I am not hating him (I would if he gave a bad review to a sonic game, joke, joke)


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 14, 2017)

Mr Objection said:


> Celebrities always do stupid things to be spotted by the camera, you know how they are. He wanted more fame and now he is having it, he is the guy being insulted and threatened by a low score. A lot of people who enver heard about him are now aware of his existence.


Why does every lower-than-perfect score for a Nintendo game necessarily have to be a scam or some kind of an intricate conspiracy? Sometimes they just release games that aren't very good or innovative. We deal with the same crap with Pokemon releases every year - they're all reskins of the same game with actual new entries whenever Nintendo releases a new portable, but God forbid someone gives them any less than a 9 or says that they're repetitive or people will burn the reviewer's house down and parade the corpse around. This year I actually skipped Sun and Moon altogether and I couldn't be happier - I had more time to enjoy other games. By the way, 7/10 is not low, it's 3 points away from a perfect score.


----------



## frighteningedge (Mar 14, 2017)

That's enough Internet for the day...


----------



## codezer0 (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Why does every lower-than-perfect score for a Nintendo game necessarily have to be a scam or some kind of an intricate conspiracy? Sometimes they just release games that aren't very good or innovative. We deal with the same crap with Pokemon releases every year - they're all reskins of the same game with actual new entries whenever Nintendo releases a new portable, but God forbid someone gives them any less than a 9 or says that they're repetitive or people will burn the reviewer's house down and parade the corpse around. This year I actually skipped Sun and Moon altogether and I couldn't be happier - I had more time to enjoy other games.


Considering sun/moon won't even unlock the national dex in any way, shape or form, you're not missing much.


----------



## Mr Objection (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Why does every lower-than-perfect score for a Nintendo game necessarily have to be a scam or some kind of an intricate conspiracy? Sometimes they just release games that aren't very good or innovative. We deal with the same crap with Pokemon releases every year - they're all reskins of the same game with actual new entries whenever Nintendo releases a new portable, but God forbid someone gives them any less than a 9 or says that they're repetitive or people will burn the reviewer's house down and parade the corpse around. This year I actually skipped Sun and Moon and I couldn't be happier.


Pokemon is a good series with a lack of innovation (a very big one). You won't lose nothing for not playing sun or moon. I am not saying that his review is true or false, I am being skeptical. We don't know the real true


----------



## Bonestorm (Mar 14, 2017)

Foxi4 said:


> Why does every lower-than-perfect score for a Nintendo game necessarily have to be a scam or some kind of an intricate conspiracy? Sometimes they just release games that aren't very good or innovative. We deal with the same crap with Pokemon releases every year - they're all reskins of the same game with actual new entries whenever Nintendo releases a new portable, but God forbid someone gives them any less than a 9 or says that they're repetitive or people will burn the reviewer's house down and parade the corpse around. This year I actually skipped Sun and Moon altogether and I couldn't be happier - I had more time to enjoy other games.


BOTW is a masterpiece..only hampered by technical issues that could still be resolved. 

a 7 is obvious trolling behavior, easy fame


----------



## fatsquirrel (Mar 14, 2017)

His reviews sure are shit for a "pro reviewer"


----------



## Mr Objection (Mar 14, 2017)

Bonestorm said:


> BOTW is a masterpiece..only hampered by technical issues that could still be resolved.
> 
> a 7 is obvious trolling behavior, easy fame


As I said we don't know, maybe a troll who wanted more fame, or maybe someone who is so honest that bypassed the fanboy's opinions. Just wait after giving a final opinion, we have to see who this goes on. So I won't talk more about the topic, I prefer to be patient.


Also, I think that you must be a coward to say that you will kill someone from your pc, where nobody knows you, I know you can be angry with his review, but that is not the way to show that you are angry, that is the way to show that you are sick.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 14, 2017)

Bonestorm said:


> BOTW is a masterpiece..only hampered by technical issues that could still be resolved.
> 
> a 7 is obvious trolling behavior, easy fame


That's just like your opinion... It is still a "meh, maybe later" for me.


----------



## codezer0 (Mar 14, 2017)

Bonestorm said:


> BOTW is a masterpiece..only hampered by technical issues that could still be resolved.
> 
> a 7 is obvious trolling behavior, easy fame


It's still the same elf-eared mute.

It's still the same princess with stockholm's syndrome.

it's still the same fat piggy final boss.

All shiggy did was copy Rockstar and give it a GTA style format.


----------



## Bonestorm (Mar 14, 2017)

DespyCL said:


> That's just like your opinion... It is still a "meh, maybe later" for me.


"edgy"


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 14, 2017)

Bonestorm said:


> BOTW is a masterpiece..only hampered by technical issues that could still be resolved.
> 
> a 7 is obvious trolling behavior, easy fame


There's a lot more problems with it than just technical issues - some of the mechanics are just poorly thought out and could've been improved significantly with minimal effort. I could discuss them here, but I've exhausted the subject by talking about it at nauseum in our own review of the game, so I direct you there instead rather than repeat myself here.


----------



## Kikirini (Mar 14, 2017)

Uhhh... 7/10 is good. That's a better than average game.
I'm a hardcore Zelda fan and all.. but sometimes I swear we need to chill out.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

Up until recently I considered myself a Zelda fanboy. Loved every game in the series (though I would not give any of them, BOTW included, a perfect score), but looking at the reactions of the many fervent complainers I guess I still have a long way to go.

I've looked at any of their rebuttals that weren't "shit reviewer makes shit reviews and I have no idea how to refute him so I"ll just say he's shit" but there isn't really any productive argument against him either, with the all-too-common "GRAPHICAL GLITCHES DON'T RUIN MY EXPERIENCE SO I'LL IGNORE IT ENTIRELY AND GIVE IT 10/10!" which in itself is a huge problem. The framerate dips didn't hinder my enjoyment either, but it wasn't something I could just ignore as well. Many of the reviewers seem to ignore it entirely. The consumable items that we call weapons was a hindrance too that I got used to, but I can't just ignore it entirely. It'll always be there.

LoZ BotW is a very good game. A solid 8/10 for me. But in no game should you be forced to adapt to a terrible mechanic and give it a perfect score otherwise.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

The idea somehow that everybody must unilaterally accept a score because many critics agree is extremely flawed. And to prove my point, all of you 10/10ers out there,  go on metacritic now and see which is the 2nd best game ever, above than BOTW. Yes Tony Fucking Hawk Skating 2. On the psOne. So, we either agree to disagree because everybody has their own opinion, OR we simply take whatever critics say for granted and we are not allowed to think otherwise.

Personally, games that i think are crap, although critics FUCKING WET their pants on them:

1. All fallouts (Battle system boring as hell)
2. MGS Phantom Pain (could not play more than a few hours - turned from a highly stylised espionage action title to an private army simulator)
3. Most rpgs that feature in depth card games (countless)
4. All halo games

Most of these are very high up in the top games rank in Metacritic no less. I still think this Zelda is better than most of them. Yet i agree with Jim and i actually rate BOTW as a 7/10 for multiple various reasons. I was playing just before, when i got bored of the a few things i have to repetitively do (and i did countless times before in other open world games in a better fashion no less) and just shut it down.

To each his own, i enjoy the game, but make NO MISTAKE. Take Link out, take the Zelda branding out, release the very same thing on the Switch and i would bet this would never grab more than 7-8/10.

If you think there is no bias, think again. I went and bought a Switch 1st day of release to play Zelda (without even looking at the trailer). Why? Because of my bias towards one of my all time favourite series. If i had no bias at all, i would simply calmly wait until everybody has reviewed it and make my informed decision.

The fact that he is DDOS'd does not paint a good picture to me and i highly doubt this was done by nintenbots. As for the accusations that he scored the game exactly whatever was needed to drop it a point... sigh...


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 14, 2017)

So he made a video to weigh in on his own review. I love his videos


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 14, 2017)

I didn't even like BotW as much as everyone else seems to be(hell I wrote a user review on here and gave it a 6.9) but Jim's review is kinda trite. Either way though, didn't deserve a DDoS


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 14, 2017)

Crystal the Glaceon said:


> So he made a video to weigh in on his own review. I love his videos



Speeking of Jim, his website is still going down repeatedly. really says a lot about the people whining like a bunch of undignified babies because he didn't give it a 10/10 that they'd still be DDoSing his website. Thank God, for Jim Fucking Sterling Son.

Edit: I really have far too much to say about why this isn't the best game ever, and certainly not a great Zelda. I can't help but wonder if the REAL hardcore fans might feel a bit betrayed by BoTW in a year's time after the hype blinders fall off. In all likely hood in the same way Banjo and Kazooie fans felt about Nuts and Bolts after the hype faded, and in the same way Nuts and Bolts would have been a better game without the B&K name tied to it and all that brings, they might feel like BoTW would have been better if it wasn't tied to the Zelda name and all it brings...


----------



## xdarkx (Mar 14, 2017)

As some other commenters said, DDoS someone's website is childish.  If people like the game, then they should buy the game.  Not like a 'bad' review would affect their purchase.  Guessing people just want good reviews to justify their purchase (which is also childish in my opinion and nothing new).


----------



## Kioku_Dreams (Mar 14, 2017)

DespyCL said:


> Neat.
> 
> But being realistic, mario oddysey looks promising. Sadly is the only first party game that looks promising. No, i'm not counting xenoblade 2 since it is being developed by a second party studio. Splatoon 2 you say? Pfft, looks almost the same as the wii u one and yet people shit on cod for being the same.
> 
> B-but mah fire emblem warriors... EW, another dynasty warriors resking. Disgusting.



Then you can't count Naughty Dog studios for Sony or Coalition for Microsoft.

Also, isn't Splatoon 2 just a port? I swear I remember reading that somewhere.


----------



## Jao Chu (Mar 14, 2017)

My god, nintendo fanboys are second to none in the cancerous fanbase hierarchy


----------



## Ritsuki (Mar 14, 2017)

This is really a shame. Good or not, this is just a question of opinion. If you don't like the guy, just ignore him. I really like this Zelda so far because it's different but still feels like Zelda, but I haven't played the game enough to give a final advice.


----------



## drag0nscythe (Mar 14, 2017)

Haven't given a damn about review scores in years. Don't care what people think of a game. If I enjoyed it then it was worth the cost of admission. 

I loved playing Armored core, .hack franchise, and Robot alchemic drive. All received low scores because of XY or Z. To take a critic so seriously is just a waste of energy.


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 14, 2017)

So funny, internet... 7/10 isnt high enough for you? What fucked up reality we live in? Like, 8.5/10 is a middle score? C'mon .....
He got death threats for a review? Wyf? @Tom Bombadildo did you also got threats for your life for the "low" score? Wow internet is so stupid...


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

Guy probably just likes bad games, suck at botw then bash the game for clickbait views or maybe Sony cashed him a bit.


People don't understand this is more serious than they think it is. It's not "just a game" but the history of the video game industry. Zelda being a benchmark does dictate the way the industry trends from now on and is bigger than the needs a YouTuber or a site has for views and is sure bigger than a potential Sony's "tip", if there was any.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



natanelho said:


> So funny, internet... 7/10 isnt high enough for you? What fucked up reality we live in? Like, 8.5/10 is a middle score? C'mon .....
> He got death threats for a review? Wyf? @Tom Bombadildo did you also got threats for your life for the "low" score? Wow internet is so stupid...



Wanna know why people consider 7/10 a bad score? Look at some of games who get 7/10 or even 8/10. They're mostly garbage. That's why.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Guy probably just likes bad games, suck at botw then bash the game for clickbait views or maybe Sony cashed him a bit.
> 
> 
> People don't understand this is more serious than they think it is. It's not "just a game" but the history of the video game industry. Zelda being a benchmark does dictate the way the industry trends from now on and is bigger than the needs a YouTuber or a site has for views and is sure bigger than a potential Sony's "tip", if there was any.
> ...


...no this isn't that serious. he just didn't like the game as much as others and is being honest about it. it would actually be _worse_ if he lied and gave it a 10/10 just to make people happy.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> ...no this isn't that serious. he just didn't like the game as much as others and is being honest about it. it would actually be _worse_ if he lied and gave it a 10/10 just to make people happy.


I don't like dark souls games because I wanted them to be something else. I suck at them, have no patience for constant half second dodging or trying the same boss dozens of times.

But I'd never dare review the game, because I get what the idea behind this design was and it's not bad, I just don't like it.

Now this is not what this guy or some others did. They did wanted to be heard saying "Well weapons break that sucks because you know, they could just not break or at least easily" or "I don't like this because it's different from other Zelda games and not giving it a pass because it's a Zelda game".

Unless these people can come with a sound argument on why the game is not that good and explain why those decisions Nintendo made were bad, they should not be "reviewing" the game because all they're going to do is get people who hate on the game and mostly didn't really play it to cozy around them like a campfire.


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Guy probably just likes bad games, suck at botw then bash the game for clickbait views or maybe Sony cashed him a bit.
> 
> People don't understand this is more serious than they think it is. It's not "just a game" but the history of the video game industry. Zelda being a benchmark does dictate the way the industry trends from now on and is bigger than the needs a YouTuber or a site has for views and is sure bigger than a potential Sony's "tip", if there was any.
> 
> Wanna know why people consider 7/10 a bad score? Look at some of games who get 7/10 or even 8/10. They're mostly garbage. That's why.


If game companies look at scores and go from there then that is their problem. If game companies consider simple games as a benchmark without looking into it then that is also their problem. Nobody seems to have a problem with a game company committing financial suicide by trying to make a new world of warcraft or call of duty.

On scores are these from the same reviewer in the same timeframe (there are some places that adjust scores as time goes on but it is a logistical nightmare so most don't), and is the reader of a similar likes and dislikes for games?
Otherwise why should we care if a random review reader is incapable of doing good maths and logic?




Jao Chu said:


> My god, nintendo fanboys are second to none in the cancerous fanbase hierarchy


Worse than fanboys of various gods?


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> I don't like dark souls games because I wanted to be something else. I suck at them, have no patience for constant half second dodging or doing the same boss dozens of times.
> 
> But I'd never dare review the game, because I get what the idea behind this design was and it's not bad, I just don't like it.


what I'm getting from this is that if you don't like the game's mechanics or the ideas behind it, then you can't review the game, which is flat out false. if it's done poorly it should be criticized, in a review or anything. this should *not* stop you from reviewing the game. he did say he doesn't like that weapons break too fast, and he explained why he doesn't like it.


netovsk said:


> Now this is not what this guy or some others did. They did wanted to be heard saying "Well weapons break that sucks because you know, they could just not break or at least easily" or "I don't like this because it's different from other Zelda games and not giving it a pass because it's a Zelda game".
> 
> Unless these people can come with a sound argument on why the game is not that good and explain why those decisions Nintendo made were bad, they should not be "reviewing" the game because all they're going to do is get people who hate on the game and mostly didn't really play it to cozy around them like a campfire.


a big portion of the review is about the weapon durability. he explains how it works and what problems it has. a lot of them break way too easily so you'd have to pause and pick another weapon or try and pick one of the ones off the ground. even though you can repair weapons, he thinks it's not worth the amount of resources it requires to do so.

another big part is stamina; he also talks about stamina and how it runs out too quickly, when the world starts raining and you can't climb up cliffs, etc. these are all very valid points. and you might not have a problem or enjoy these in the game, which is just fine. but it's also fine if someone else doesn't like them, and mentions that in a review.

quick question, did you read the review?


----------



## heartgold (Mar 14, 2017)

natanelho said:


> So funny, internet... 7/10 isnt high enough for you? What fucked up reality we live in? Like, 8.5/10 is a middle score? C'mon .....
> He got death threats for a review? Wyf? @Tom Bombadildo did you also got threats for your life for the "low" score? Wow internet is so stupid...


Scores by reviewers have changed what meant 10 years ago, is no longer in the same ballpark, these days you got just an average ok games scoring 7/8's what would have been 5/6, so now if a game doesn't get a 9 or 10, it isn't considered high quality. Reviewers have scewed this over by giving mediocre games higher scores than they deserve. 7 is considered low in this day and age if the game is meant to be a top notch quality which Zelda botw is, has few flaws which aren't enough to put it down.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> what I'm getting from this is that if you don't like the game's mechanics or the ideas behind it, then you can't review the game, which is flat out false. if it's done poorly it should be criticized, in a review or anything. this should *not* stop you from reviewing the game. he did say he doesn't like that weapons break too fast, and he explained why he doesn't like it.
> 
> a big portion of the review is about the weapon durability. he explains how it works and what problems it has. a lot of them break way too easily so you'd have to pause and pick another weapon or try and pick one of the ones off the ground. even though you can repair weapons, he thinks it's not worth the amount of resources it requires to do so.
> 
> ...



That's mindless rant. If weapons breaking were really a problem then how can a guy beat the game in less than 2 hours, forcing himself to beat the last boss at full hp and its 4 incarnations in a row and without "that" weapon?

It never is a problem, there are many many weapons throughout the game, this mechanic is just incentive for you to try dozens of different weapons instead of sticking to one. Where other games would lock you out or just put an invisible wall to prevent you from fighting an enemy you're not supposed yet, BotW just makes it hard but it's technically possible even beating a guardian without using weapons proper and relying on Sheikah Slate powers instead. It was an excellent design choice on Nintendo's part and it's pros easily outweigh any cons imaginable.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> That's mindless rant. If weapons breaking were really a problem then how can a guy beat the game in less than 2 hours, forcing himself to beat the last boss at full hp and its 4 incarnations in a row and without "that" weapon?
> 
> It never is a problem, there are many many weapons throughout the game, this mechanic is just incentive for you to try dozens of different weapons instead of sticking to one. Where other games would lock you out or just put an invisible wall to prevent you from fighting an enemy you're not supposed yet, BotW just makes it hard but it's technically possible even beating a guardian without using weapons proper and relying on Sheikah Slate powers instead. It was an excellent design choice on Nintendo's part and it's pros easily outweigh any cons imaginable.


and he doesn't like that. so what? reviews aren't entirely objective and they are based off the reviewer's opinion. you might think it's "excellent design choice" but he thinks it's a poor design choice that weapons break too quickly. that doesn't make him any more right/less wrong, that's just what he feels about it.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> and he doesn't like that. so what? reviews aren't entirely objective and they are based off the reviewer's opinion. you might think it's "excellent design choice" but he thinks it's a poor design choice that weapons break too quickly. that doesn't make him any more right/less wrong, that's just what he feels about it.




You're wrong.

I pointed out why it's great and why it's better than other options. It encourages you to use every weapon in the game and use your abilities. It makes finding a weapon always significant and makes you decide if an enemy is worth engaging or not.

Other options would just have you mashing Y your way with a single weapon through the game.

The criticism about raining is ridiculous. Raining makes climbing impossible but makes sneaking easier allowing you to go undetected. If raining is a problem just find a roof or a cave, set up camp and wait for rain to go away like you'd do in real life.

This guy and other reviewers who bashed the game couldn't come up with real criticism. On that joke of a review posted here on he temp for instance the guy just assumes shrines are meant to replace dungeons. How does he know that? Does the game at any moment say that? Are you forced to do any shrines? No you're not. All you get is being rewarded for doing so.

Jim Sterling review was probably meant to attract attention as he pleases haters going against general consensus that this game is a breakthrough in the game industry. Well he got the attention of haters, that's for sure.


----------



## omegasoul6 (Mar 14, 2017)

I really enjoy BotW and don't really enjoy any of Jim Sterling's videos.

That being said if you're sending someone death threats or DDOSing someone over a low review score, you're insane.


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

Benja81 said:


> I seriously doubt that overall performance will be hit 50%, running at lower speeds does not necessarily equate literally to overall performance. The performance will ultimately be less, but you could compare this to a PC game running at "high" quality settings (docked mode) vs "medium" (portable mode).


Hahaha no, the modified chipset make the switch a more powerfull shield K1, nothing more, nothing less (okay more, you can run nintendo game). This console is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa[...]aaaar from allowing high quality on low/med perf...
In term of price/perf and considering add-on price, this console would have receive a low score.

BotW is a really good game, but it should have not receive so many "10/10" with all those flaws it got. It was a flagship game. If it would have failed, the console would have been dead born.
Nintendo being not sure about, he may have helped a bit. But seriously it would not have been necessary, with gameplay and story the game would have won his medals easily.

I stay on my opinion that Nintendo could have done way more with the hardware but no, Nintendon't.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> I pointed out why it's great and why it's better than other options. It encourages you to use every weapon in the game and use your abilities. It makes finding a weapon always significant and makes you decide if an enemy is worth engaging or not.


cool, it's good that you enjoy it and think it's great. but it's not wrong at all for someone like Jim to dislike this at all. not at all. this is a very subjective thing and you can't just say "your opinion is wrong and mine is right/you just don't get it". you don't have to like a game mechanic!


netovsk said:


> The criticism about raining is ridiculous. Raining makes climbing impossible but makes sneaking easier allowing you to go undetected. If raining is a problem just find a roof or a cave, set up camp and wait for rain to go away like you'd do in real life.


sure it does, but it still makes climbing harder, which sometimes might be the only way to get somewhere. it also affects certain parts of the story I'm not going to spoil.


netovsk said:


> This guy and other reviewers who bashed the game couldn't come up with real criticism. On that joke of a review posted here on he temp for instance the guy just assumes shrines are meant to replace dungeons. How does he know that? Does the game at any moment say that? Are you forced to do any shrines? No you're not. All you get is being rewarded for doing so.
> 
> Jim Sterling review was probably meant to attract attention as he pleases haters going against general consensus that this game is a breakthrough in the game industry. Well he got the attention of haters, that's for sure.


to me you're acting like you didn't read the review and that he has to like the game as much as other people. he's not trying to stand out by giving it a lower score, that's just what he thinks of the game. remember he still *liked* the game, but apparently 7 must be shit.

he doesn't like the weapon durability and neither do I. weapons break too quickly and it makes me scared of using better weapons because I don't want to lose them. stamina is too low by default which can make it harder to run away or climb - climbing especially since if it runs out in the middle, I can fall to my death.

please stop acting like any score that is not 10 or 9 is automatically clickbait, because that is not what clickbait means.


----------



## ertaboy356b (Mar 14, 2017)

It's funny how Assassin's Creed Chronicles: China is better than Breath of the Wild based on his past reviews.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> cool, it's good that you enjoy it and think it's great. but it's not wrong at all for someone like Jim to dislike this at all. not at all. this is a very subjective thing and you can't just say "your opinion is wrong and mine is right/you just don't get it". you don't have to like a game mechanic!
> 
> sure it does, but it still makes climbing harder, which sometimes might be the only way to get somewhere. it also affects certain parts of the story I'm not going to spoil.
> 
> ...



Ok man I'm tired and this is getting us nowhere.

Thanks for the input. Have a good one.

Cheers!


----------



## omegasoul6 (Mar 14, 2017)

Molina said:


> Hahaha no, the modified chipset make the switch a more powerfull shield K1, nothing more, nothing less (okay more, you can run nintendo game).



The Switch's chipset is actually based on a modified Tegra X1 which is the chipset that's used in the Nvidia Shield TV.


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> That's mindless rant. If weapons breaking were really a problem then how can a guy beat the game in less than 2 hours, forcing himself to beat the last boss at full hp and its 4 incarnations in a row and without "that" weapon?


Speed run is 1 hour 14 minutes (and I think he went for all 4 mystical beasts) , and he beat the shit outta Ganon with a stick... a stick... STICK.

In short, speed run is "Angry kid in underwear running and climbing mountain". Apparently there is a big skip on a mountain.


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 14, 2017)

heartgold said:


> Scores by reviewers have changed what meant 10 years ago, is no longer in the same ballpark, these days you got just an average ok games scoring 7/8's what would have been 5/6, so now if a game doesn't get a 9 or 10, it isn't considered high quality. Reviewers have scewed this over by giving mediocre games higher scores than they deserve. 7 is considered low in this day and age if the game is meant to be a top notch quality which Zelda botw is, has few flaws which aren't enough to put it down.


Is there a standardised review score system out there then? Personal to the reviewer would pretty much have to be the only way to do it from where I sit. To be compelled to join some kind of irrational (though I suppose you argue it is a kind of a reverse exponential number scale) hive mind would not be cool.



netovsk said:


> That's mindless rant. If weapons breaking were really a problem then how can a guy beat the game in less than 2 hours, forcing himself to beat the last boss at full hp and its 4 incarnations in a row and without "that" weapon?
> 
> It never is a problem, there are many many weapons throughout the game, this mechanic is just incentive for you to try dozens of different weapons instead of sticking to one. Where other games would lock you out or just put an invisible wall to prevent you from fighting an enemy you're not supposed yet, BotW just makes it hard but it's technically possible even beating a guardian without using weapons proper and relying on Sheikah Slate powers instead. It was an excellent design choice on Nintendo's part and it's pros easily outweigh any cons imaginable.



There is a phrase that runs just because you can do something does not mean you have to, while not terribly relevant here the sentiment is. Just because you can do a game without something if a mechanic is in a game it stands to reason that it should enhance the gameplay in some way.
There are a variety of mario hacks out there that crank the timing and some measure difficulty along with that up to levels some might dub perverse, still very much able to be completed though. Would Mario have been as good a game if such things were there, it is still technically completable? You could debate it but it would not be a clear cut victory.
The guy stated what he likes in games in the review "I can’t say I find it particularly edifying.", so a sense of edification, possibly via combat and references a few systems he previously enjoyed. Not unreasonable in which you are cast as the hero of the land and are to beat the bad guy and his minions, and I am sure I could probably go find a dev of the game saying they want you to be that too. There are games that aim for other things, many horror games aim to beat you down, things like dwarf fortress are designed to have you fail, sim city is deliberately ambiguous...
Forcing you to move outside your comfort zone is fine too -- how many games feature a "hero is captured and has to fight their way out" level?

Or if you prefer there is an old creed, it informs a certain approach to weapons which many may expect. The Japanese take this up a notch as well if you ever consider their approach to swords.
"This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine. My rifle is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I master my life. My rifle, without me, is useless. Without my rifle, I am useless."

Again though most are not arguing against the idea of a durability system, though some certainly have, but the specific implementation of this one. Others have covered basic things that might have been done to improve it within the framework of the game (damage on failed hits, blocking, progressively less damage until you get it fixed...), in other games certain enemies might be more vulnerable to certain arms and techniques, or damage might mean you want a bit more range, a bit more speed....

"other games would lock you out or just put an invisible wall"
Don't act like it is a remotely new or under explored concept. There are countless examples of that going back to Diablo and probably the roguelikes that spawned it, as well as from a whole bunch of open world games going back to the 2d GTAs. Various enemies might be way harder than just mashing attack and chugging health potions will allow you to beat, however they are there and if you are good enough you might well beat them below the "suggested" level.


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

omegasoul6 said:


> The Switch's chipset is actually based on a modified Tegra X1 which is the chipset that's used in the Nvidia Shield TV.


Never said it was based on K1, I compare power. And the switch don't even compare to a Shield Tv since nintendo had the great idea to modify it, making the switch chipset less powerful.

Nintendo had a opportunity and they wasted it.


----------



## DarkIrata (Mar 14, 2017)

Just wanted to say that a game review should be objective and not on own opinions. You review it for people who will read it and base there expectations on it. 
Ah and yes the review score system is broken. I miss the good old times, reason more to ignore reviews and just look a few gameplay videos.

7.6/10 - To much whining


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 14, 2017)

DarkIrata said:


> and just look a few gameplay videos.


For a Nintendo game? Good luck with that.

I really hope my sarcasm detector did not give me a false positive for that first part too.

That said I find certain types of gameplay footage to be harder to use for that -- editing tends to have it trend towards pulse pounding action when I would look to the gameplay videos to see how it handles it downtime.

Edit. Forgot to include a suitable video for the thread


----------



## Taleweaver (Mar 14, 2017)

(note: haven't read all 11 pages of comments)

*sigh*

Seriously? What kind of times are these? 

Donald Trump: I hate EVERYBODY!!! I hate my employees! I hate women! I hate Mexicans! I hate poor people! I hate international treaties! I hate the media! I hate politicians! I double-hate Obama! Russians are cool, though.
Audience: yeeeey! *votes the guy as president*

Jim Sterling: yeah, this video game is pretty good but it has some annoying flaws that prevent it from being great.
Audience: WHAT?!!!??? *launches a DDoS attack*


(yeah, I know I'm generalizing stuff, but come on...some people on this internet-thing really gotta learn to disagree in a civilized matter).


----------



## Online (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Wanna know why people consider 7/10 a bad score? Look at some of games who get 7/10 or even 8/10. They're mostly garbage. That's why.



.....are you high?


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

Online said:


> .....are you high?



Yeah, whatever answer doesn't make me go through previous reviews to find examples and makes you do it instead.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Yeah, whatever answer doesn't make me go through previous reviews to find examples and makes you do it instead.



I'd just like to point out that just because there is a purpose behind a game mechanic, even if it is a valid one, has no impact on weather or not people find said mechanic fun.

Fun is subjective. And if there are mechanics in the game that get in the way of you having fun, then that's entirely a valid reason to dock a score on a review.

It's not as though the guy didn't play the game, or didn't actually post a 4 page essay about everything he liked and didn't like about it.
If he didn't find something fun, who are you to tell him why he's wrong for not having fun?

That's the mindset of a child.
People are different, have wildly differing tastes, and that's how life is. Get used to it.

And let me tell ya, there's a reason Jim is a popular critic and you aren't.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> I'd just like to point out that just because there is a purpose behind a game mechanic, even if it is a valid one, has no impact on weather or not people find said mechanic fun.
> 
> Fun is subjective. And if there are mechanics in the game that get in the way of you having fun, then that's entirely a valid reason to dock a score on a review.
> 
> ...



Reviews are not meant to be subjective. Just because you don't like something, doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad. Gotta show clear reasons as to why something is good or not.

The reviewer is wrong and to me it's clear by now that this subjectiveness crap is a cover up for lack of solid arguments against BotW. Not wasting more time on this, already said what I had to, will not repeat myself over and over. Have a good one.


----------



## Hero-Link (Mar 14, 2017)

Molina said:


> Never said it was based on K1, I compare power. And the switch don't even compare to a Shield Tv since nintendo had the great idea to modify it, making the switch chipset less powerful.
> 
> Nintendo had a opportunity and they wasted it.




What? Do you have a Nvidia Shield TV?

I have one and let me tell you... the Shield TV can only do 30 FPS (and has several FPS drops) on Metal Gear Solid: Revengeance.
And the graphics are BAD compared to any other version...

Using a modified X1 chip, they can pull MORE power, they have improved it. Please check your facts before posting...

They could have used a better chip, obviously, but that would also increase the price and it wouldnt simply be 10 bucks...


Ah, Bonus point... Nvidia was the one doing the modification...


Now regarding the topic in question.... Jim Sterling and others youtubers should be in the user reviews.

Specially Jim Sterling, who told that its "okay to pirate nintendo games", even if he was being sarcastic...

Plus he has given better reviews to much worse games, BOTW doesn't deserve 10/10, but still... his reviews shouldnt be accounted to the same level as profissional websites / magazines.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Reviews are not meant to be subjective. Just because you don't like something, doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad. Gotta show clear reasons as to why something is good or not.
> 
> The reviewer is wrong and to me it's clear by now that this subjectiveness crap is a cover up for lack of solid arguments against BotW. Not wasting more time on this, already said what I had to, will not repeat myself over and over. Have a good one.


reviews are inherently subjective and will always be biased based on the reviewer's opinions. there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. if you want a 100% objective review I suggest you read https://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml

I still think Jim explained his points just fine....


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> reviews are inherently subjective and will always be biased based on the reviewer's opinions. there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. if you want a 100% objective review I suggest you read https://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml
> 
> I still think Jim explained his points just fine....




You keep telling yourself that readers/watchers question in their minds is "does this guy like the game?" rather than "is this game good/worthy of purchase?".


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Reviews are not meant to be subjective. Just because you don't like something, doesn't necessarily mean that it's bad. Gotta show clear reasons as to why something is good or not.
> 
> The reviewer is wrong and to me it's clear by now that this subjectiveness crap is a cover up for lack of solid arguments against BotW. Not wasting more time on this, already said what I had to, will not repeat myself over and over. Have a good one.



There's a plenty of objective points as to why weapon degradation systems are objectively a poor game mechanic.
They cover up for the fact that you have too many weapons that are actually _too good. And thus your weapons are directly encouraging a distinct lack of variety._

People will find something that works and abuse it if they can- the degrading weapons system was clearly implemented to encourage variety- when instead they could've done several other things to encourage the use of other weapons, such as:


Make different weapons more effective against specific enemies

Make different weapons better at parrying against enemies holding a specific kind of weapon.
Literally keep the same degradation system, just give every weapon a little more health so that you don't lose 3 swords against a horde of like 5 bokoblin.
Make weapons only lose health when hitting enemy shields or when enemies parry your attacks.
I'm not even a critic, but even I can see and think of better approaches to encouraging variety than having a bunch of weapons made of _glass.

And if there are ways something can be made better, it's not perfect, now is it?

Mr. Objectivity, are you saying anything less than perfect deserves a perfect score?_


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 14, 2017)

Funny to see more salty people here....

grow up.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Guy probably just likes bad games, suck at botw then bash the game for clickbait views or maybe Sony cashed him a bit.
> 
> 
> People don't understand this is more serious than they think it is. It's not "just a game" but the history of the video game industry. Zelda being a benchmark does dictate the way the industry trends from now on and is bigger than the needs a YouTuber or a site has for views and is sure bigger than a potential Sony's "tip", if there was any.
> ...



That would be true, but before BOTW. BOTW borrows pretty much 95% of its mechanics from games out there for years, some of them decade old by now. It is really not just a game, this is true, which is why people waiting this game for a long time are either very happy or not entirely happy. You can see it as a new age of Zelda or a mashup of 5-10 open world games blended together. Zelda used to be a benchmark, but BOTW will not revolutionise like the previous ones did. It will not be a benchmark across the industry, but it will certainly be for nintendo platforms and the Switch though.

And this is precisely the problem and why many of us giving it less than 10/10, other than personal grievances. That it is not much more than a (good) culmination of otherwise done-a-lot open world mechanics. To the un-initiated to open world games it might look like the garden of eden, but to somebody that played them all (or most) it feels like a well known paradigm for sure.

I would expect Nintendo to innovate, as we expect them to do. What is left from Nintendo, if all they do is copy mechanics done before and for many years? As i see no real innovation here in the general scope, (but i do understand that within the zelda universe this looks like innovation), it is only natural for me to consider this less than a Zelda offering. After all Nintendo is supposed to be the leader, not the follower.

Any Switch critic (me included) was flamed hard in this very forum for being a graphics whore, mainly because Nintendo is the leader and the visionary and the innovator. Let's see where the innovation lies now that the game is out. I simple expected more from the world's best game studio. When the world's best game studio falls back to copy mechanics right left and centre, why is it a surprise many people are left to want more?


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

The problem with scores is not what a 7 or 9 means, because people can't really tell scores apart. It's the list of games this guy is trying to say BotW is worse than.

if you're going to say this is on the same level as The Last Guardian for instance at least come up with decent arguments.



CheatFreak47 said:


> There's a plenty of objective points as to why weapon degradation systems are objectively a poor game mechanic.
> They cover up for the fact that you have too many weapons that are actually _too good. And thus your weapons are directly encouraging a distinct lack of variety._
> 
> People will find something that works and abuse it if they can- the degrading weapons system was clearly implemented to encourage variety- when instead they could've done several other things to encourage the use of other weapons, such as:
> ...




Different weapons ARE  better against different enemies. Depending on the enemy a specific weapon can 1 shot them. Guardian shields can reflect back deadly guardian lasers. You probably didn't even play Breath of the Wild. I'm not wasting more time on this, have a nice day.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

ertaboy356b said:


> It's funny how Assassin's Creed Chronicles: China is better than Breath of the Wild based on his past reviews.



Reviews should always be looked upon with reflection on current time and other things such as hardware, similar titles etc. Tony Hawk 2 is #2 best game of all time, well above BOTW and only just below OOT. Simply because when it came out it was a blast. If you keep thinking scores in reviews are timeless, think again. There are timeless games yes, but most of them are not. Then, there are games unilaterally thought as excellent and your opinion will be different. I personally hate Phantom Pain, people love it.


----------



## DeadlyFoez (Mar 14, 2017)

I believe they failed with the Wii U version. The screen on the tablet is almost useless unless you are playing on the tablet itself. When you are playing on the tv, there is nothing that gets displayed on the tablet. They should have at least make it display a map or some character information, or something. Instead, when it comes time to name your horse you have to select keys on a virtual on screen keyboard using the directional buttons, whereas they could have just made the keyboard show up on the wii u tablet and make it much easier to name your horse.

Just a few minor things that I think they really bonered when they had plenty of chance to greatly improve it.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> The problem with scores is not what a 7 or 9 means, because people can't really tell scores apart. It's the list of games this guy is trying to say BotW is worse than.
> 
> if you're going to say this is on the same level as The Last Guardian for instance at least come up with decent arguments.
> 
> ...




So what, if in his opinion game X is better than game Z? At the end of the day, it matters which game you have more fun with. Reviews are not, and should not be taken as a bible of gaming. If you feel 1-2-switch is greater than Horizon, then so be it. You vote with your wallet.

As for arguments, again, you cannot force an argument on somebody who does not feel the same way. Personally, the weapon degradation implemented by Nintendo is game breaking for me. The weapon degradation in Dying Light is fine, as it is exactly between being annoying, yet making you hunt for weapons and merchants to get the best next gear. I was literally trying to do the shrine with the Major Strength test yesterday and i literally destoyed all my weapons and arrows (not to mention bows and shields) at the guardian and it was still alive, leading in an obviously silly death. You might say that i did not have powerful weapons, but my opinion is that they should not break as quickly. Both are fine arguments.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> The problem with scores is not what a 7 or 9 means, because people can't really tell scores apart. It's the list of games this guy is trying to say BotW is worse than.
> 
> if you're going to say this is on the same level as The Last Guardian for instance at least come up with decent arguments.
> 
> ...


You have said that like 3 times by now and you keep comming to defend the game...


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Different weapons ARE  better against different enemies. Depending on the enemy a specific weapon can 1 shot them. Guardian shields can reflect back deadly guardian lasers. You probably didn't even play Breath of the Wild. I'm not wasting more time on this, have a nice day.



Yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that those weapons are still made of glass to encourage variety. They could've _focused _on that instead of saying "what we did isn't good enough, make every weapon made out of marshmallows".

Losing a good weapon isn't fun. Nobody likes losing things.

I'd love for you to explain to me why losing a weapon is fun, go ahead and try.




netovsk said:


> The problem with scores is not what a 7 or 9 means, because people can't really tell scores apart. It's the list of games this guy is trying to say BotW is worse than. if you're going to say this is on the same level as The Last Guardian for instance at least come up with decent arguments.



So what you're saying is that Review score systems are stupid. I actually agree with that. They are pretty stupid.
You can't wrap a game in a little bow and give it a score like it's some kind of talent show.
But sometimes it's convenient to do so.

Jim Sterling knows this, but he also knows that he can't remain relevant without that system, and he clearly demonstrates that there are merits to such a system.

If there weren't merits to a review score system, Metacritic couldn't even exist.

Which is why you should actually read his review- to understand his complaints instead of just looking at a score.

If you think review score systems are so stupid why are you bothered that the game got a 7/10 from one critic?
If you think scores are stupid and they don't matter why does it bother you?

Is it because someone pointed out weaknesses in something you enjoy?
Ya know, just because someone else can find flaws in something doesn't mean you have to stop enjoying it.
It doesn't make the game any less fun for you, does it?


----------



## porkiewpyne (Mar 14, 2017)

Ayyy let's go egg that IGN reviewer's house for giving Pokemon ORAS a 7.5 because "too much water". And tomorrow, we'll take down Rotten Tomatoes and Yelp 

What the hell has this world come to? :\


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> Ya know, just because someone else can find flaws in something doesn't mean you have to stop enjoying it.
> It doesn't make the game any less fun for you, does it?



Depends. It is widely held that trying to make works that out and out* appeal to experts in that field is one of the harder things to do. If reading the review in turn increases your knowledge of a field (ever learned a new term from a review, or how something might be codified if you sort of understood the concept already) and causes you to notice something now and forever more... Ignorance could well be bliss, or at least easier to find bliss in.

*you probably could make a film that impresses Steven Spielberg or someone of similar stature, however it will probably be with the qualifier of "made in 2 days on a budget of £50 and two bottles of vodka". Go toe to toe with him on a more money than both of us combined will see in our lives type budget and that changes.

Granted that it is no way a good reason to not review something.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

FAST6191 said:


> Depends. It is widely held that trying to make works that out and out* appeal to experts in that field is one of the harder things to do. If reading the review in turn increases your knowledge of a field (ever learned a new term from a review, or how something might be codified if you sort of understood the concept already) and causes you to notice something now and forever more... Ignorance could well be bliss, or at least easier to find bliss in.
> 
> *you probably could make a film that impresses Steven Spielberg or someone of similar stature, however it will probably be with the qualifier of "made in 2 days on a budget of £50 and two bottles of vodka". Go toe to toe with him on a more money than both of us combined will see in our lives type budget and that changes.
> 
> Granted that it is no way a good reason to not review something.



Pretty much my point exactly, mate.

What happened here is that Sterling punched a hole in the ignorance of the masses and then they got mad about it and started DDoSing him.
People acting like children, thinking ignorance is something they should be allowed to defend.


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

Hero-Link said:


> Using a modified X1 chip, they can pull MORE power, they have improved it. Please check your facts before posting...


They *COULD*, but they didn't, check yours before posting. Their chipset is an low modified for power consumption. Lower clock speeds (docked), more battery life, less power.
It's not like a switch could run MGRR...



Hero-Link said:


> Ah, Bonus point... Nvidia was the one doing the modification...


Under the directives of Nintendo. Like Nvidia is going to impose his chipset in a console he doesn't own. Nintendo tell them how they plan to use their chipset, Nvidia modify it accordingly (no kidding, it's their technology. They are not going to let anyone else modify it)



Hero-Link said:


> They could have used a better chip, obviously, but that would also increase the price and it wouldnt simply be 10 bucks...


And thus from my previous statement, you pay 300+ bucks for a console and expensive addons only for the capacity to play Nintendo game. Which in the case of BotW (and Mario Odyssey incoming) may be worth it depending of the opinion.
Nvidia shield Tv being more than a simple console (and the fact that it's not portable), cannot be compare in terms of features but can in term of power/price.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> Yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that those weapons are still made of glass to encourage variety. They could've _focused _on that instead of saying "what we did isn't good enough, make every weapon made out of marshmallows".
> 
> Losing a good weapon isn't fun. Nobody likes losing things.
> 
> ...



I pointed out many times exactly why he pulled a 7/10 out of his ass without giving proper reasons and yet you waste time writing this. What's the plan? Making me repeat myself over and over to get your point across?



CheatFreak47 said:


> Pretty much my point exactly, mate.
> 
> What happened here is that Sterling punched a hole in the ignorance of the masses and then they got mad about it and started DDoSing him.
> People acting like children, thinking ignorance is something they should be allowed to defend.




Gotta love the "Ignorance of the masses statement", which clearly shows that unlike you're trying to tell me it's not only his toally very own personal opinion but some sort of "truth" that only "the chosen few" can perceive.

Well I'm sorry Zelda is very likely going to be GOTY and HZD or whichever game released this year you liked more won't.

So, play Zelda, maybe?


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Well I'm sorry Zelda is very likely going to be GOTY and HZD or whichever game released this year you liked more won't.


Even though I love BotW, it don't think he will be GOTY. Media covered so much BotW, that you seem to forget that other went live in the same time and are big opponents.
If BotW win, it will likely be an awkward situation like Overwatch goty when everyone wondered "uuuh what? With Doom alongside of Uncharted 4, Overwatch won?"


----------



## DeslotlCL (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> I pointed out many times exactly why he pulled a 7/10 out of his ass without giving proper reasons and yet you waste time writing this. What's the plan? Making me repeat myself over and over to get your point across?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again, you keep comming to this thread to defend the game... didn't you say you had enough of this?


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> I pointed out many times exactly why he pulled a 7/10 out of his ass without giving proper reasons and yet you waste time writing this. What's the plan? Making me repeat myself over and over to get your point across?
> 
> Gotta love the "Ignorance of the masses statement", which clearly shows that unlike you're trying to tell me it's not only his toally very own personal opinion but some sort of "truth" that only "the chosen few" can perceive.
> 
> ...



And out of all the GOTY every year, i could not give the slightest of shits for 80% of them. Does this mean they are bad games? No, it means they are not my cup of tea. Similarly, just because BOTW might take it, does not mean anything, when it comes to our *personal opinions*. If you really need anyone to tell you what to play based on what is game of the year, then you must have not played a Nintendo game since 1998!

I love it when people defend the GOTY decision when it is a nintendo game, yet say they are bullshit when it is not. Do you feel the same way about Fallout 4? Journey? Dragon age? Overwatch?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I really don't get it. It is the same with movies. Just because some movies are highly regarded by critics, do i have to agree? I am the only one in my circle who thinks John Wick blows, does this mean my opinion is less relevant? No. It means that more people find it entertaining than not.

Same with Zelda. It is a success. Most people enjoy it than not. The ones that not, have valid arguments. Learn to respect diversity or else go and play each and every GOTY out there because the critics said so.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

geodeath said:


> I love it when people defend the GOTY decision when it is a nintendo game, yet say they are bullshit when it is not. Do you feel the same way about Fallout 4? Journey? Dragon age? Overwatch?




Calling Journey a game is a bad joke. One of the worse apps I executed on my ps4.

Overwatch is somehow a TF2 ripoff but improves many aspects and try to bring people who never liked fps to the genre while being accessible and inclusive so I give it props for that.

Loved DAI and Fallout 4 so it's not a concern to me.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Calling Journey a game is a bad joke. One of the worse apps I executed on my ps4.
> 
> Overwatch is somehow a TF2 ripoff but improves many aspects and try to bring people who never liked fps to the genre while being accessible and inclusive so I give it props for that.
> 
> Loved DAI and Fallout 4 so it's not a concern to me.



Yet i know people that thought Journey is what they are looking for in a game. I played it and i found it an incredible small game for what it is. It was nice as an experience and definitely something different. Yes, it is not like a full fledged game, yet so many people regard it highly. What does the fact that you think it is a joke means? That GOTY awards are a joke? If so, treat all of them as jokes and we are cool. If you do not think it is a joke, then you have to accept there are other opinions.

I much prefer playing Journey than Fallout myself. I find the battle of Fallout the single most boring thing i have ever played in my life, and i have been through thousands of crap games. Yet i respect some people like it. The same way people need to respect that for some people Zelda has game breaking flaws.

It is called choice. You cannot argue with people's opinion. You can discuss arguments but thats it. No matter how many critics tell me so, the combat system of this Zelda for me is completely flawed. I still enjoy it. Just less. How that affects other people experiences, i fail to understand.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

Molina said:


> Even though I love BotW, it don't think he will be GOTY. Media covered so much BotW, that you seem to forget that other went live in the same time and are big opponents.
> If BotW win, it will likely be an awkward situation like Overwatch goty when everyone wondered "uuuh what? With Doom alongside of Uncharted 4, Overwatch won?"


No it will not, U4 didn't really innovate in any way and Doom is a niche game. I don't see something outside an unexpected groundbreaking indie game to beat Zelda for goty but ofc I might be proven wrong. Sony won't make a game to goty again much to ps4 fans demise.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 14, 2017)

I would agree with those who say 10/10 ils subjective BS, if there wasn't tens of different reviewers who gave the game between 90 and 100. The probability that every single of them is a blind Ninty fanboy is ridiculously low. As opposed to the probability that 7/10 reviews are actually more wrong, which is pretty high. That's high school statistics. A high number of reviews will give something that ressembles a Gaussian distribution centered around the average grade, here 97-98. This is perhaps why only 2 reviews gave it around 70. And the problem is that a gradibg scale cannot be absolute. There is no such reference as a 'perfect' game. That's why OoT got 99 when it was released. Today, I bet it would get a 15/100 or less on Metacritic just for the low-poly models.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

DespyCL said:


> Again, you keep comming to this thread to defend the game... didn't you say you had enough of this?


Because I can, because I keep getting quoted. why do you care?


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> I would agree with those who say 10/10 ils subjective BS, if there wasn't tens of different reviewers who gave the game between 90 and 100. The probability that every single of them is a blind Ninty fanboy is ridiculously low. As opposed to the probability that 7/10 reviews are actually more wrong, which is pretty high. That's high school statistics. A high number of reviews will give something that ressembles a Gaussian distribution centered around the average grade, here 97-98. This is perhaps why only 2 reviews gave it around 70. And the problem is that a gradibg scale cannot be absolute. There is no such reference as a 'perfect' game. That's why OoT got 99 when it was released. Today, I bet it would get a 15/100 or less on Metacritic just for the low-poly models.



I would agree with the numbers but opinions do not come with statistics unfortunately. What you can extract from the ratings is that more people like it than not. There is no wrong in a smaller number of opinions vs a larger number, else it would be very easy to tilt the scale by paying everybody to give 10/10. There is some good commentary in the medium to bad ratings on metacritic, if you can filter between the bullshit ones that are there only to bring the score down.


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 14, 2017)

geodeath said:


> I would agree with the numbers but opinions do not come with statistics unfortunately. What you can extract from the ratings is that more people like it than not. There is no wrong in a smaller number of opinions vs a larger number, else it would be very easy to tilt the scale by paying everybody to give 10/10. There is some good commentary in the medium to bad ratings on metacritic, if you can filter between the bullshit ones that are there only to bring the score down.



Off topic but relevant: an experience was done among something like 100-200 people. They were asked to estimate the number of candies in a big jar. The calculated average abd median were both close to the real result with less than 0.5% error.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

StarTrekVoyager said:


> Off topic but relevant: an experience was done among something like 100-200 people. They were asked to estimate the number of candies in a big jar. The calculated average abd median were both close to the real result with less than 0.5% error.



I am all for stats and behavioural economics or econometrics, but the problem here is that a game "feels" different for each of us.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

geodeath said:


> Yet i know people that thought Journey is what they are looking for in a game. I played it and i found it an incredible small game for what it is. It was nice as an experience and definitely something different. Yes, it is not like a full fledged game, yet so many people regard it highly. What does the fact that you think it is a joke means? That GOTY awards are a joke? If so, treat all of them as jokes and we are cool. If you do not think it is a joke, then you have to accept there are other opinions.
> 
> I much prefer playing Journey than Fallout myself. I find the battle of Fallout the single most boring thing i have ever played in my life, and i have been through thousands of crap games. Yet i respect some people like it. The same way people need to respect that for some people Zelda has game breaking flaws.
> 
> It is called choice. You cannot argue with people's opinion. You can discuss arguments but thats it. No matter how many critics tell me so, the combat system of this Zelda for me is completely flawed. I still enjoy it. Just less. How that affects other people experiences, i fail to understand.



My very own personal opinion is that Journey is a joke, I didn't like the game but I can totally understand why other people would enjoy it - for the experience that transcends bounds of gaming and blah blah blah.

I didn't call GOTY awards a joke, so yeah.

There's a difference between "I don't like this" and "This is bad". For this thread it's "I don't like it" when asked to elaborate on what are the games flaws and "This is bad" when someone agrees that Zelda doesn't deserve all the praise it's getting. Yeah, right.


----------



## geodeath (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> My very own personal opinion is that Journey is a joke, I didn't like the game but I can totally understand why other people would enjoy it - for the experience that transcends bounds of gaming and blah blah blah.
> 
> I didn't call GOTY awards a joke, so yeah.
> 
> There's a difference between "I don't like this" and "This is bad". For this thread it's "I don't like it" when asked to elaborate on what are the games flaws and "This is bad" when someone agrees that Zelda doesn't deserve all the praise it's getting. Yeah, right.



I see what you mean. But projecting my own experience of the game, i do not personally think the game deserves all the credit it gets. I understand why other people think so and i am happy for them to make it GOTY if they want. However, i will stick to my opinion and i have all the reasons to back it up if needed. How can i agree both to the statements that "i do not like a game for X and Y" and at the same time agree that "it deserves all the praise"? It might be possible when we are talking about a game genre you do not generally enjoy (i.e. i never play beat em ups, so i do not even get in such a conversation), but for a genre you enjoy these 2 statements contradict each other. Also consider the emotion. As people are emotional for the game to succeed and because many people regard it highly, some others are emotional if they find that they do not enjoy it as much as they expected (me).

Filtering out the over-reactions is key to understanding the sentiment and anyone of us can easily filter the fanboys or haters, keeping the discussion at what it is that went wrong with these few things some people do not like.

I personally think that Nintendo can add options for the game to enable us to customise it to our taste. I understand that they are too proud and will never probably do that (as doing it, will almost certainly mean that they did something wrong) so i am hopeful that in the future there will be a patch or a v2 or a "master edition", ultimate edition, GOTY edition whatever they decide to call it, that will address these, then everybody can play the game in their own way. Or a nice trainer, if the switch gets hacked


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Guy probably just likes bad games, suck at botw then bash the game for clickbait views or maybe Sony cashed him a bit.
> 
> 
> People don't understand this is more serious than they think it is. It's not "just a game" but the history of the video game industry. Zelda being a benchmark does dictate the way the industry trends from now on and is bigger than the needs a YouTuber or a site has for views and is sure bigger than a potential Sony's "tip", if there was any.
> ...


Dont over estimate zelda.. its not more important then, say, gta or assasins creed... nobody dictates the industry, people get what people want, and the need doesnt change because of some one super game... 
Also, youre not the only man here. Some people think the lack of big dungeons and the existence of breakable weapons arent the best things the zelda franch. has to  offer... it doesnt has anything to do with how hard it is or how much the reviewer sucks. This game isnt perfect, and as we can see, more then one gamer/reviewer who said it... 


heartgold said:


> Scores by reviewers have changed what meant 10 years ago, is no longer in the same ballpark, these days you got just an average ok games scoring 7/8's what would have been 5/6, so now if a game doesn't get a 9 or 10, it isn't considered high quality. Reviewers have scewed this over by giving mediocre games higher scores than they deserve. 7 is considered low in this day and age if the game is meant to be a top notch quality which Zelda botw is, has few flaws which aren't enough to put it down.


Then we should go back to the old and right way of scoring- 5 is the middle between 1,10 so it shold be the score of an avverage game... very easy to convert- substract 5 and multiply by 2...


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> No it will not, U4 didn't really innovate in any way and Doom is a niche game. I don't see something outside an unexpected groundbreaking indie game to beat Zelda for goty but ofc I might be proven wrong. Sony won't make a game to goty again much to ps4 fans demise.


Because Overwatch totally innovate... shooter kind moba game... huuuum I really wonder where I saw this already...
And for opponent, Horizon can totally be one.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

geodeath said:


> I see what you mean. But projecting my own experience of the game, i do not personally think the game deserves all the credit it gets. I understand why other people think so and i am happy for them to make it GOTY if they want. However, i will stick to my opinion and i have all the reasons to back it up if needed. How can i agree both to the statements that "i do not like a game for X and Y" and at the same time agree that "it deserves all the praise"? It might be possible when we are talking about a game genre you do not generally enjoy (i.e. i never play beat em ups, so i do not even get in such a conversation), but for a genre you enjoy these 2 statements contradict each other. Also consider the emotion. As people are emotional for the game to succeed and because many people regard it highly, some others are emotional if they find that they do not enjoy it as much as they expected (me).
> 
> Filtering out the over-reactions is key to understanding the sentiment and anyone of us can easily filter the fanboys or haters, keeping the discussion at what it is that went wrong with these few things some people do not like.
> 
> I personally think that Nintendo can add options for the game to enable us to customise it to our taste. I understand that they are too proud and will never probably do that (as doing it, will almost certainly mean that they did something wrong) so i am hopeful that in the future there will be a patch or a v2 or a "master edition", ultimate edition, GOTY edition whatever they decide to call it, that will address these, then everybody can play the game in their own way. Or a nice trainer, if the switch gets hacked



Well I sure do agree, Nintendo put out great effort for this game to be a game every person on Earth could enjoy and not just another entry to please Zelda fans.

But of course Nintendo knew they wouldn't achieve that goal 100% so adding options to tweak gameplay would be nice to an extent and I think trainers will do that job perfectly.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Molina said:


> Because Overwatch totally innovate... shooter kind moba game... huuuum I really wonder where I saw this already...
> And for opponent, Horizon can totally be one.



Yeah far cry primal tomb raider open world type of game.

No it can't.


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> No it can't.


Fanboy at its finest. Well that's end the conversation, you don't even use your brain, you just bash everything outside nintendo.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

Molina said:


> Fanboy at its finest. Well that's end the conversation, you don't even use your brain, you just bash everything outside nintendo.


Just like I did when I said I loved Fallout 4 and DAI, which are totally Nintendo games. Man this stuff gets so old, it always comes to this fanboy excuse, so I am probably a fanboy to Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft depending on the topic. The way you got triggered when I spoke about HZD clearly shows who is the fanboy, assuming there is one.


----------



## Molina (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Just like I did when I said I loved Fallout 4 and DAI, which are totally Nintendo games. Man this stuff gets so old, it always comes to this fanboy excuse, so I am probably a fanboy to Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft depending on the topic. The way you got triggered when I spoke about HZD clearly shows who is the fanboy, assuming there is one.


Find an excuse, it will totally hide the fact that you bashed out GOTY HZD without argument for the favor of BotW. Continue but not too fast, let me time to grab the popcorn.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> I pointed out many times exactly why he pulled a 7/10 out of his ass without giving proper reasons and yet you waste time writing this. What's the plan? Making me repeat myself over and over to get your point across?



How did he pull a 7/10 out of his ass? Did you actually read the review instead of just looking at a score and going "I don't like this score, time to bitch on GBAtemp."

So let me get this straight, you're saying that he should be allowed to judge a game based on the parts of it he didn't like?
What about the parts he did like, Mr. Objectivity? Is he not allowed to praise the parts he did like? Are you going to criticize him for the parts he did enjoy too?

If he's allowed to praise the parts he did like, but not shame the parts he didn't, then that's a double standard.
Can't have that. Double standards make for shitty critics and dipshit SJWs.

He played the game, looked at the parts he liked, figured out what made them enjoyable, articulated them and explained it. He looked into the parts of it he didn't enjoy and figured out _why _he didn't enjoy them, articulated that, presented the underlying _flaws_ behind the less enjoyable parts of the game, and that they are and docked points from his final score because of it.

Also, getting back to "reviews should be objective".
The idea that a review should be entirely objective is simply ridiculous. Ya know why?

It's because weather or not you like something or not is an emotional response.

Objective in the sense of video games would be tantamount to disregarding emotional response, and since the entertainment medium is designed specifically for enjoyment- for entertainment- things like "Like/Dislikes" and "Love/Hate" are inherently involved. Emotion is involved. It's a human thing. Objectivity is not a human thing, it is reserved for when humans are presenting facts.

You're saying that something designed to be liked, shouldn't be judged based on its ability to have people like it.
That's absolutely ridiculous, because then the review wouldn't be a review. It would be a description. It would be a list of facts about the game. Really great, groundbreaking stuff.

Here- I'll "review" Breath of the Wild's weapon durability system "objectively".

"In Breath of the Wild you have swords and other weapons. When you strike your opponents, they may break after several uses. This is a gameplay mechanic known by many as weapon durability. Some people find this mechanic enjoyable, others do not."

See the problem here?


----------



## Boured (Mar 14, 2017)

OMG 7/10?! THAT BASTARD DESERVED IT!!!


Oh I thought we were talking about E.T.



In all seriousness it's sad that people do this, and being I love Jim Sterling's work it makes me all the more angry. People have opinions, people need to learn to deal with it.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> How did he pull a 7/10 out of his ass? Did you actually read the review instead of just looking at a score and going "I don't like this score, time to bitch on GBAtemp."
> 
> So let me get this straight, you're saying that he should be allowed to judge a game based on the parts of it he didn't like?
> What about the parts he did like, Mr. Objectivity? Is he not allowed to praise the parts he did like? Are you going to criticize him for the parts he did enjoy too?
> ...



Yeah man you're totally right, weapons breaking is bad because I got so attached to one of the 20 Woodcutter axes I found throughout the game. Rain is bad because it totally should not happen because I was going to climb a peak but couldn't and this so pissed me off. Stamina sucks so much I hate it when I'm doing something and link gets tired, bad Nintendo.

Yeah man it's a total 7/10 I think Assassin's Creed Chronicles China is definitely better than Breath of the Wild, thanks for clearing my mind. Cheers

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Molina said:


> Find an excuse, it will totally hide the fact that you bashed out GOTY HZD without argument for them favor of BotW. Continue but not too fast, let me time to grab the popcorn.



I don't need to, upcoming events will prove you a delusional fanboy as you swallow that bitter pill


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Yeah man you're totally right, weapons breaking is bad because I got so attached to one of the 20 Woodcutter axes I found throughout the game. Rain is bad because it totally should not happen because I was going to climb a peak but couldn't and this so pissed me off. Stamina sucks so much I hate it when I'm doing something and link gets tired, bad Nintendo.



When there's other options that would've made the weapon durability mechanic more fun, and less annoying, yes.

Another idea, what if your weapons only broke when you throw them at enemies, and do less damage and such when they have been used too much? What if they added a place where you could repair your weapons and shields and sell old ones or even *gasp *upgrade them to make them better if you actually _like a specific weapon?_ Wouldn't that be cool? Wouldn't it make weapons feel like they aren't worthless?

Wouldn't not having the fear of losing weapons constantly encourage actually fighting mobs on those blood moons more?

Are you honestly going to sit here and say what Nintendo decided to do here is completely perfect in every way, and there's no possible improvements that could be made?

_


netovsk said:



			I don't need to, upcoming events will prove you a delusional fanboy as you swallow that bitter pill 

Click to expand...

_
Also, I'm totally fine with Breath of the Wild being Game of the Year.

What I'm not fine with is delusional fanboys like you making people like me look bad.
I actually like Nintendo and want them to grow and improve over time instead of fading into obscurity because they didn't change anything, because everything was perfect the way it was, when it really wasn't.

Grow up, kid.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> When there's other options that would've made the weapon durability mechanic more fun, and less annoying, yes.
> 
> Another idea, what if your weapons only broke when you throw them at enemies, and do less damage and such when they have been used too much? What if they added a place where you could repair your weapons and shields and sell old ones or even *gasp *upgrade them to make them better if you actually _like a specific weapon?_ Wouldn't that be cool? Wouldn't it make weapons feel like they aren't worthless?
> 
> ...



Weapons actually do DOUBLE damage if you throw them, if you even played the game you would know that. About being perfect there is no perfect choice here, I think they did the best choice at the current time but even Miyamoto would be quick to agree improvements could be made even though he wouldn't really point any and your bad ideas sure aren't some of them.

Why are you taking something I said to another person out of context and bringing it like I said it to you? Circlejerk much?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I'm not fine with a guy like you, which showed to barely know anything about the game trying to bring it to an argument with me and just making yourself look worse. Why are you so bent on this? Is this something about proving you are not part of "the ignorant masses"? Get a life.


----------



## porkiewpyne (Mar 14, 2017)

@netovsk You constantly claim that some people in this thread are equating "I don't like this" to "This is bad". But are you not at the same time doing the same by pushing for the weapons durability being a good thing? You seem to enjoy that feature so good on you. I don't see why others should follow suit. At the end of the day, the review is based on how much a reviewer enjoyed a game and as much as we try to standardise everything, there is no set checklist of sorts as to what makes a game good. Some things have higher weightage that other factors which will affect their overall perception. You suggested that reviews should be objective. That is impossible in this scenario simply because of the nature of the subject being reviewed. Like other works of art, standards vary. You can compare specs and have benchmark tests for tech but not art. It's like rating L'Arlésienne higher than The Weeping Woman. Or the other way round. You can like one more than the other even if the rest of the world doesn't feel the same way and it doesn't make any person's decision more or less valid than that of the other camp. The same goes for food critics. More often than not, I find myself disagreeing but that does not make their reviews invalid. What about polarising foods such as balut, stinky tofu and durian? You see what I am getting at?


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

@porkiewpyne 
You don't like weapons breaking? Ok. Does that mean it's a flawed decision on Nintendo's part? No. Do you have to like BotW? Not at all. The fact that you don't like it does mean you're not part of "ignorant masses" like some other guy said? Definitely not, you're probably being contrarian that's all.


----------



## porkiewpyne (Mar 14, 2017)

@netovsk It appears that weapon durability is frequently brought up by more than a couple people so one has to wonder if it is indeed people trying to be hipsters just for the sake of it or if it is indeed a suboptimal system. If someone feels that a mechanism is significantly annoying such that it significantly detracts from the experience and that a change to that mechanism will subsequently alter said experience, then I don't see why said person cannot view it as a con.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

@porkiewpyne According to this kind of logic, one could just say Dark Souls for instance is not a good game because it's too hard and punishing and this detracts from the entertainment the player is supposed to have.

Now try to voice this exact opinion everywhere and prepare to unleash the torrent of hate and trolling and god knows what.


----------



## narutopet112 (Mar 14, 2017)

Its jim opinion. Jesus people just enjoy breath of the wild. Its not like he ruined the expirience for you?. I personally give the game a 8.5.  I mean weapon durability for the biggoron sword? Change conventions not the lore. Also thunder kills link 1 hit yet enemy's still survives it? Even with great armor and such it does a lot of damage to  link. Balance much?


----------



## netovsk (Mar 14, 2017)

@narutopet112 

As link gets more powerful he is eventually able to survive a thunder strike. Maybe those enemies have more than a few "hearts"?


----------



## ShadowOne333 (Mar 14, 2017)

Meh, he got what he was looking for.
If he got screwed over for his "opinion", suits him well, he is obviously going for the clickbait and attention, and attention whores are the worst.

Sure the game has its flaws, every game has, the Stamina is pretty limiting, but can be enhanced with Spirit Orbs.
I would only go against it for the Durability system and the framedrops.
If they included a way to restore weapons which have been worn-out and worked on the framedrops, then the game would surely get a 9.5/10 from me.
Right now I would give it a 9 or 8..5, I've been hooked to it since release.


----------



## narutopet112 (Mar 14, 2017)

netovsk said:


> @narutopet112
> 
> As link gets more powerful he is eventually able to survive a thunder strike. Maybe those enemies have more than a few "hearts"?


Bokoblins? The ones i easley kill? I understand that link is more human than those monsters thus gonna hurt more. So maybe monsters have some kind of resistance. But bokoblin can be defeated with arrow thunder. Even when using on water it kills bokoblin. But the thunder is doesnt. Strongerst armor isnt that much different from the weakest. There is a slight difference.


----------



## porkiewpyne (Mar 14, 2017)

@netovsk As a matter of fact, I was thinking of that game when mentioning a suboptimal and punishing system. And to answer your query, it would make it "bad" in the sense that I would enjoy it much more had it been toned down but at the same time, I am not saying that it is terrible and needs to be chucked in the bin.


----------



## RedBlueGreen (Mar 14, 2017)

What I find funny is how many people in the thread are mad because 1 person didn't enjoy your "masterpiece" game enough to give it 10/10. It's not like the metacritic score went down to 60. Just accept that people have different tastes. If anything you guys look stupid for being butthurt over one guy's opinion.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

The amount of ignorance in this thread is ridiculous. Weapons can be repaired by the way. Special weapons can be repaired by blacksmiths. Other weapons can be repaired by a method. Google _"the octorok Trick" _and you will see. Also to the guy who said that lightning was an instant kill and then went on to complain about enemies not dying to your lightning, lightning is not an instant kill if you're powerful enough. Stop whining just because you're a scrub. Get better gear, play the game, inform yourselves, and have fun with this 10/10 game. That's not even mentioning the EASY infinite stamina trick.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

Gotta love people who say Jim is calling the game bad just out of spite and attention whoring. I guess the multiple times he declares that he enjoyed BOTW and that he said it was a good game totally passed by them. It just so happens that the flaws (or as many of the fanboys would like to say, "aspects") of the game happened to displease him and lessen his overall experience. Apparently the large amount of reasoning behind all of it is completely ignored by the fanboys, because apparently they do not know the definition of opinion and thus can declare someone's opinion as "wrong".

This even devolved to an argument to whether a review should be objective or subjective. I thought it would be common sense that all reviews need both. A review with complete objectivity is no different from just describing the features of the game, as it's impossible to say whether the game is enjoyable or not without bias. Want an objective review on a game? Might as well look up a wikipedia article or the wikia for the game. At the same time, a review cannot be completely subjective as it practically equates to biased rambling then. This is what most of the haters on this particular review are leaning towards, because they can't be bothered to read the reasons why Jim doesn't like certain parts of the games.

A review needs both. If you dislike a part of the game, clearly explain why. Jim does, believe it or not. If you like a part of the game, clearly explain why. Most reviewers dealing with BotW did. However, a review shouldn't be entirely based in one side either. Almost all reviewers choose to ignore entirely the flaws (no matter how small) of the game, stating why they only like it. Jim, and by another extension Tom Bombadildo stated both why they disliked AND why they liked the game, but apparently the "liked" portion of their review was totally ignored by the fanboys.

That being said, a review being "wrong" is entirely asinine. It's his opinion, with quite a bit of objectivity backing it up. It's literally NO different from me saying "Oh? You like the consumable item weapon system? YOU'RE WRONG". 

Also disclaimer, I don't agree with his score, though I agree with his points.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> Gotta love people who say Jim is calling the game bad just out of spite and attention whoring. I guess the multiple times he declares that he enjoyed BOTW and that he said it was a good game totally passed by them. It just so happens that the flaws (or as many of the fanboys would like to say, "aspects") of the game happened to displease him and lessen his overall experience. Apparently the large amount of reasoning behind all of it is completely ignored by the fanboys, because apparently they do not know the definition of opinion and thus can declare someone's opinion as "wrong".
> 
> This even devolved to an argument to whether a review should be objective or subjective. I thought it would be common sense that all reviews need both. A review with complete objectivity is no different from just describing the features of the game, as it's impossible to say whether the game is enjoyable or not without bias. Want an objective review on a game? Might as well look up a wikipedia article or the wikia for the game. At the same time, a review cannot be completely subjective as it practically equates to biased rambling then. This is what most of the haters on this particular review are leaning towards, because they can't be bothered to read the reasons why Jim doesn't like certain parts of the games.
> 
> ...


His Review was wrong, objectively. There is a way to repair weapons, which he didn't know about but still.... there is a way to fix them.. Just saying...


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> The amount of ignorance in this thread is ridiculous. Weapons can be repaired by the way. Special weapons can be repaired by blacksmiths. Other weapons can be repaired by a method. Google _"the octorok Trick" _and you will see. Also to the guy who said that lightning was an instant kill and then went on to complain about enemies not dying to your lightning, lightning is not an instant kill if you're powerful enough. Stop whining just because you're a scrub. Get better gear, play the game, inform yourselves, and have fun with this 10/10 game. That's not even mentioning the EASY infinite stamina trick.



None of these are even actually repairing. The zora blacksmith, for a very small selection of weapons, will practically give you a new one, not your old one. The octorock actually upgrades your weapon. Even if you classify these as "repairing", which it obviously isn't, that would mean I would have to explore for an octorock or visit that zora to "fix" my gear. The fact that these are called "tricks" already tells you that you have to go out of your way to get it done. But hey, let's just ignore all of it and give it a 10/10! ZELDA FOR LIFE.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> His Review was wrong, objectively. There is a way to repair weapons, which he didn't know about but still.... there is a way to fix them.. Just saying...


Probably should actually read the review. Just because you can repair them doesn't invalidate the argument- because the argument is about how having to do that isn't much fun in the first place.

Also, glitches aren't considered "redeeming factors" just because they are easy. That's not the intended game behaviour.


----------



## RedBlueGreen (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> His Review was wrong, objectively. There is a way to repair weapons, which he didn't know about but still.... there is a way to fix them.. Just saying...


The fact that you said someone's opinion is objectively wrong pretty much ruins your credibility, or as you would say, your opinion is objectively wrong.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

RedBlueGreen said:


> The fact that you said someone's opinion is objectively wrong pretty much ruins your credibility, or as you would say, your opinion is objectively wrong.


I said the REVIEW was wrong, not his opinion. It was wrong because you can repair weapons. I never said all weapons can be repaired either. I said that "weapons can be repaired" and I was right.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> I said the REVIEW was wrong, not his opinion. It was wrong because you can repair weapons. I never said all weapons can be repaired either. I said that "weapons can be repaired" and I was right.



And I can say objectively that this is wrong. You get a new weapon from the zora blacksmith. He forges you a NEW one. Something that Jim has mentioned in his videos. The Octorock UPGRADES your weapon. You get a NEW one.

Objectively speaking, there is NO way to repair your weapon. Nintendo has really gone of their way to make it to make it so. It was entirely intentional, and whether this was a good move or not is debatable.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> Probably should actually read the review. Just because you can repair them doesn't invalidate the argument- because the argument is about how having to do that isn't much fun in the first place.
> 
> Also, glitches aren't considered "redeeming factors" just because they are easy. That's not the intended game behaviour.


Now you're just being a nitpicker. It's amazing the lengths people will go through to try and drag the game down. Like the idiots who tried to mass bomb its metacritic score. I never said it was a "redeeming factor" I merely pointed out that it was easily possible to keep running. The fact that this wasn't patched in with the update means that it might not have even been a mistake.


----------



## raystriker (Mar 14, 2017)

I don't have a Switch or BoTW but the reviewer in question is irrate because the game is harder than he would have wanted it to be? Well boo-hoo


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> And I can say objectively that this is wrong. You get a new weapon from the zora blacksmith. He forges you a NEW one. Something that Jim has mentioned in his videos. The Octorock UPGRADES your weapon. You get a NEW one.
> 
> Objectively speaking, there is NO way to repair your weapon. Nintendo has really gone of their way to make it to make it so. It was entirely intentional, and whether this was a good move or not is debatable.


http://gaming.stackexchange.com/que...-another-flameblade-or-repair-the-one-ive-got    This ocktorok "trick" is actually in the official guide book so it was intended. Also, it REPAIRS the WEAPON. It also can repair rusted weapons and UPGRADE them to their un-rusted counterparts. Know your shit man. Jim sterling is just an uninformed scrub who spent 10 hours on the game. Just like you. "The Octorok repair method is not a bug, it is stated in the guide as an official way to repair a weapon or turn a rusty weapon into a new one"


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> http://gaming.stackexchange.com/que...-another-flameblade-or-repair-the-one-ive-got    This ocktorok "trick" is actually in the official guide book so it was intended. Also, it REPAIRS the WEAPON. It also can repair rusted weapons and UPGRADE them to their un-rusted counterparts. Know your shit man. Jim sterling is just an uninformed scrub who spent 10 hours on the game. Just like you.



Are you reading your own post? Apparently rusted=unrusted to you? That is not the same weapon. If you happen to break that rusty weapon, is it not gone? Can you "fix" it after being broken? No. You instead _upgrade_ a rusty weapon into it's unrusted form. I can see why you'd consider this as repairing, but game mechanic-wise this is just upgrading your weapon. Not fixing. Seriously, take a chill pill and learn how fallacious your own arguments are

But hey, I'm a scrub who doesn't know how to play the game according to you. *claps*

EDIT: Now that you added your little additional statement, I can't believe you are still butthurt about the statement of facts. "Turn your weapon into a new one". That's not repairing. Once your weapon breaks, it breaks. End of story. You might be able to get a new one from the zora. Or you could get an upgraded one from the octorock, given your weapon isn't broken.

Good god, anybody with common sense can see Nintendo purposely gave no repairing options for your weapons. I'm not even declaring it as bad or good in my latest posts, but it's fact. You can't fix your stuff. You can upgrade, yes. You can get a new one, yes. But can you fix the SAME weapon after it broke or loses durability? No.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

DUDE, there is video evidence that you can fix broken weapons with this method. Look this shit up scrub. It works. It's in the guidebook to so it's legit. Play the game or look at one of the few videos showing the ocktorok repair method. 

Yes you are a scrub. *CLAPS*


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> Also disclaimer, I don't agree with his score, though I agree with his points.


So do I. But, some of the arguments still piss me off. That's like giving the game to be reviewed by a guy who hates open-worlds, or who hates Zelda, or something like that.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> Are you reading your own post? Apparently rusted=unrusted to you? That is not the same weapon. If you happen to break that rusty weapon, is it not gone? Can you "fix" it after being broken? No. You instead _upgrade_ a rusty weapon into it's unrusted form. I can see why you'd consider this as repairing, but game mechanic-wise this is just upgrading your weapon. Not fixing. Seriously, take a chill pill and learn how fallacious your own arguments are
> 
> But hey, I'm a scrub who doesn't know how to play the game according to you. *claps*


When you play through he game, and your weapon in the menu is glowing red, you should know to take it to a rock ocktorok anywhere in the world and get it repaired. If you want to repair the special weapons take them to a blacksmith. It's repair because you can only do this after you originally obtain the weapons they break. It's as simple as that. I've proved that both of these are intended methods for repairing broken weapons.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

"EDIT: Now that you added your little additional statement, I can't believe you are still butthurt about the statement of facts. "Turn your weapon into a new one". That's not repairing. Once your weapon breaks, it breaks. End of story. You might be able to get a new one from the zora. Or you could get an upgraded one from the octorock, given you HAVEN'T broken the rusty weapon you plan to upgrade. Is its durability restored? Yes. Is it the same weapon? No. It's not repaired.

Good god, anybody with common sense can see Nintendo purposely gave no repairing options for your weapons. I'm not even declaring it as bad or good in my latest posts, but it's fact. You can't fix your stuff. You can upgrade, yes. You can get a new one, yes. But can you fix the SAME weapon after it broke or loses durability? No."

YOU CAN FIX A WEAPON AFTER IT LOSES DURABILITY! YES. Clearly, I've proven that.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

What on earth happens to your equipment after it breaks (save the master sword)? They disappear. With a few exceptions like the lightscale trident being able to be reforged, once a weapon is broken, it is GONE. This was entirely intentional. Why on earth are you arguing it? This isn't discussing whether it's a drawback or not (I would consider it so but i got used to it), this is a mere statement of facts.

And as far as the octorock "fixing your weapon" goes, you are getting a NEW weapon, just like the Zora reforging. I can see why you would equate it to fixing, but it isn't. But hey, let's just pick out a few words and say HURR DURR I AM RIGHT YOURE A SCRUB HUUR DURRR


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> What on earth happens to your equipment after it breaks (save the master sword)? They disappear. With a few exceptions like the lightscale trident being able to be reforged, once a weapon is broken, it is GONE. This was entirely intentional. Why on earth are you arguing it? This isn't discussing whether it's a drawback or not (I would consider it so but i got used to it), this is a mere statement of facts.


I've proven you wrong, you can infact repair broken weapons in the game. You can repair a weapon that loses durability. I've proven that. A system in the game does allow for the "repair" of weapons. When you go to a blacksmith you are repairing the broken weapon. Because you can only do this after you have obtained the weapons in question and take either weapon to its blacksmith. It's repair. Call it "reforging" or whatever you did, but it is WEAPON REPAIR. This is only one of the methods I have mentioned to fix a weapon. There's also again, the ocktorok method which works on ANY weapon, and not just rusted ones. If I recall the quote in the guidebook correctly it says "It will spit it out for you in brand new condition" so yeah. Play the game and gtfo.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> Now you're just being a nitpicker. It's amazing the lengths people will go through to try and drag the game down. Like the idiots who tried to mass bomb its metacritic score. I never said it was a "redeeming factor" I merely pointed out that it was easily possible to keep running. The fact that this wasn't patched in with the update means that it might not have even been a mistake.



I'm not really trying to drag the game down- On the contrary, most criticize the things they love the most. I'm just pointing out a logical flaw in your argument.

I love Breath of the Wild, I just think that there are several areas where it could be improved, one of those, if not the biggest flaw in the game is the lack of depth on the weapon durability system. It could be better, a lot better actually.

Some other things I think could improve the game.

Discourage save-scumming more, especially with the amiibo implementation.
Make it so eating food and elixirs actually has to happen in real time so you can't abuse it as much during battle.
Overall I love the game, and the thing is, Jim Sterling _also likes the game_ despite parts of it not being to his taste. People need to calm the hell down over a review score that isn't 10/10. It's really stupid and it makes Zelda fans look like a bunch of lummoxes that can't handle legitimate criticism.

Ya know, people also gave Skyward Sword 10/10 scores when it came out, and that game is by no means- "10/10 perfect, best game of all time" material.
Breath of the Wild is closer to that than Skyward Sword was, but it's by no means a perfect game, and it's important to recognize that.

A 7/10 score is also not a "burn this game at the stake never play" score, so I don't understand why there's all this hate being spread around.
7/10 is still good- great even.

The game isn't perfect. It _is great_ but not perfect.
Why does it need to be universally critically acclaimed for people like you to be satisfied, can't you just go on your merry way and play the damn game like everyone else?

Some people value Jim Sterling's opinion enough to judge weather or not to purchase Breath of the Wild based on his opinion.

If you hate Jim Sterling and his fans, then why would you want them to play this wonderful perfect game anyway? If it's so special, maybe we just don't deserve it anyway. Either way, you already bought the game, you didn't make an uninformed decision based on this review, why does it matter?

Nodoby is "Dragging this game down" by giving it a 7/10.

Breath of the Wild is already one of the most critically acclaimed video games of the past decade, let alone this year- Isn't that enough for you?
"Jim Fucking Sterling Son doesn't like it better throw a hissy fit on an online forum and DDoS his website off the internet to try to censor him!"

Yeah no, that's ridiculous. That's what this thread is about.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> I'm not really trying to drag the game down- On the contrary, most criticize the things they love the most. I'm just pointing out a logical flaw in your argument.
> 
> I love Breath of the Wild, I just think that there are several areas where it could be improved, one of those, if not the biggest flaw in the game is the lack of depth on the weapon durability system. It could be better, a lot better actually.
> 
> ...


I don't agree with the DDos and never did. I think it's as stupid as the people who went on metacritic and tried to bomb its score. Even dumber actually. I do think that Jim did this for attention but he might have genuinely thought this way. I merely pointed out that his review was "objectively" wrong because you could repair broken "Weapons"(Multiple). Either way, I like and appreciate your calm, collected response to me. Better then others... Who shall not be named.

EDIT: Also, when people give Breath of the Wild a 10/10 they are not calling it perfect. I'm not, and many others are not. People know that 10/10 isn't perfect, and I've never claimed it meant perfect. A perfect game does not exist, Ocarina of time isn't perfect. A perfect game is a game that CAN not exist. It's a game that makes everyone who plays it find no flaws within it.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

Argh, have you played the game yourself? What does zora blacksmith say to you about the lightscale trident? HE'LL MAKE YOU A NEW ONE AFTER YOURS BREAKS. Not that he'll fix it for you.

The octorock is debatable, but as proven with the rusty weapons, he spits out a "new" weapon. This weapon may be the exact same as the one you threw in, but it's a new weapon regardless. The zora remakes your weapons, and so does this octorock, otherwise he'd give me back my rusty gear (I threw it at him with the intention of getting the unrusted form, also the enemy in particular are rock octoroks)


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> Argh, have you played the game yourself? What does zora blacksmith say to you about the lightscale trident? HE'LL MAKE YOU A NEW ONE AFTER YOURS BREAKS. Not that he'll fix it for you.
> 
> The octorock is debatable, but as proven with the rusty weapons, he spits out a "new" weapon. This weapon may be the exact same as the one you threw in, but it's a new weapon regardless. The zora remakes your weapons, and so does this octorock, otherwise he'd give me back my rusty gear (I threw it at him with the intention of getting the unrusted form, also the enemy in particular are rock octoroks)


No, I've quoted from the guidebook. It's not a new weapon, the rock ocktorok repairs it. Non debatable. Sorry to burst your bubble but this proves that "there is a weapon repair system" and that "Broken weapons can be repaired" so yeah! GG Mate, try harder. He repairs a rusted and broken weapon or a weapon that loses durability, he doesn't give you a new one. He "repairs" it.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

"Broken" weapons can be repairable? Aside from the two that the Zora will reforge, and huge emphasis on reforge, what happens to my weapons save for the "unbreakable" ones after I use up all their durability? They are gone. Do I lose it forever? Yes. Will I find another like it? Perhaps.

Do you even know this yourself as you seem to only be quoting from the guidebook?

Once you break something (that's breakable), unless it's one of those spears that the Zora can REMAKE, it's gone until you FIND something like it. Can you fix it? No.

Let me put in a simple question for you: I have a mop. I use up all it's durability and it breaks. Can I fix it without looking for another mop?

Also, I've yet to test it myself, but the claim of putting it a non-rusty weapon and getting it back new is contested across the BOTW community. Some says it works. Some says it doesn't. I can actually link the twitter posts for both sides.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 14, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> I don't agree with the DDos and never did. I think it's as stupid as the people who went on metacritic and tried to bomb its score. Even dumber actually. I do think that Jim did this for attention but he might have genuinely thought this way. I merely pointed out that his review was "objectively" wrong because you could repair broken "Weapons"(Multiple). Either way, I like and appreciate your calm, collected response to me. Better then others... Who shall not be named.



It's important to understand that just because there is some way to repair weapons, doesn't make the mechanic of weapons breaking so easily any less annoying, it just means there are ways you can mitigate the system if you are willing to go out of your way for it.

You seem a lot more reasonable than a lot of the other people in this thread, as well, so I'll give you this. 

Jim is one of the most brutally honest video game critics I can think of. He has an extremely nuanced view of the current state of the industry at any given time, and that's why I have a ton of respect for him and his work. It takes a lot of courage to do what he does, and he stands to lose a lot more by doing what he does.

Publishers hate the man, scummy indie developers try to sue him, and mindless fanboys send him death threats, call for him to be hung, DDoS his ad-free website offline to try and censor him, and all he makes off of it is the money people _willingly, deliberately give to him so he can keep going._

He doesn't even run ads on his video reviews or his website.
The only thing he runs ads on are his let's play videos, which he doesn't even have a problem with people blocking.

He doesn't let the big guy hold him down. He says what he wants to say and if it stirs up controversy, than so be it.
To me, Jim Sterling is the closest thing to an actual hero we can have in the video game industry.

Thank God for Jim Fucking Sterling Son.
Thank God for Him.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> "Broken" weapons can be repairable? Aside from the two that the Zora will reforge, and huge emphasis on reforge, what happens to my weapons save for the "unbreakable" ones after I use up all their durability? They are gone. Do I lose it forever? Yes. Will I find another like it? Perhaps.
> 
> Do you even know this yourself as you seem to only be quoting from the guidebook?
> 
> ...


"You can't repair Broken weapons" I've proven this statement wrong, multiple weapons can be repaired in the game with multiple methods. "The ocktorok method is unintended." I've proven this wrong. " "Do you even know this yourself." Yes. Now you're trying to play word games. It doesn't matter if it's contested in the community, because I have used this method and it works.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

You have not proven the broken weapon statement wrong, at all. What weapon aside from those spears being REFORGED and hylian gear can be fixed after they have been broken? Good god, you quoted my question too, so answer it since you seem to put massive amount into saying you're right.

"I have a mop. I use up all it's durability and it breaks. Can I fix it without looking for another mop?" 

Actually, it doesn't even have to be a mop. 

I have weapon x (x being anything that's not unbreakable or an item the zora can reforge). I use up all it's durability and it breaks. Can I fix it without looking for another one?


----------



## StarTrekVoyager (Mar 14, 2017)

inb4 thread gets moved to the EOF or closed


----------



## Greymane (Mar 14, 2017)

I just got to say that, this thread has become so thick, that if it were a milkshake not even a professional prostitute could suck it through a straw.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



CheatFreak47 said:


> It's important to understand that just because there is some way to repair weapons, doesn't make the mechanic of weapons breaking so easily any less annoying, it just means there are ways you can mitigate the system if you are willing to go out of your way for it.
> 
> You seem a lot more reasonable than a lot of the other people in this thread, as well, so I'll give you this.
> 
> ...


I guess I'll take your word for it.  You seem reasonable, and I have checked out some of his videos.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



s157 said:


> You have not proven the broken weapon statement wrong, at all. What weapon aside from those spears being REFORGED and hylian gear can be fixed after they have been broken? Good god, you quoted my question too, so answer it since you seem to put massive amount into saying you're right.
> 
> "I have a mop. I use up all it's durability and it breaks. Can I fix it without looking for another mop?"
> 
> ...


"You have not proven the broken weapon statement wrong, at all. What weapon aside from those spears being REFORGED and hylian gear can be fixed after they have been broken? Good god, you quoted my question too, so answer it since you seem to put massive amount into saying you're right. I have a mop. I use up all it's durability and it breaks. Can I fix it without looking for another mop?"

Is a mop a weapon? I think not. Even still, you can repair it and any weapon, by taking it to an ocktorok. That ocktorok repairs it by restoring its durability when it's broken. Your stupid mop question only proves my point. THe menu in the game tells you when your weapon is damaged, "_damaged_. adj _broken" so yes. _

"What weapon aside from those spears being REFORGED and hylian gear can be fixed after they have been broken? Good god, you quoted my question too, so answer it since you seem to put massive amount into saying you're right."


Well, there is the Gerudo champions sword and shield and the goron champion hammer weapons that can be REPAIRED after they are broken. Not "REFORGED", but REPAIRED. Trying to change the words is something we can both do apparently, but reforged does not equal repaired.

The game even gives you warnings. "Your Hylian shield is damaged." You have no excuses for not repairing it. It's your own fault if you lose your rare sword or shield.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

So what you're trying to say is wording means everything? Because I don't equate "damaged" to being broken, especially when the game WARNS me that my weapon is at risk of being "broken". And once I use up ALL durability and the weapon disappears, the game_ tells _me it's broken. Those other champion weapon mentions, just like the zora spears, are also reforged. How do you fix something that's not even in your inventory anymore? You don't. You make a new one.

So then I happen to use the game's wording of "broken" equating to durability reached 0.

For the last time, I'm not saying that the weapons breaking easily is a downside of the game (even though I consider it so). I'm saying once the weapon reaches the state of what the game calls "broken" at zero durability, you cannot fix it. It is gone. You might be able to get new ones, but you cannot fix it.

So the Octorok trick can repair weapons, which is arguably debatable as I just threw in a near-broken dragonborne boko bat and got it back at the same condition. Perhaps it applies to certain weapons only. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that it can "repair" weapons, even if not all, but the only thing I can confirm is that if you throw in rusty gear it gives you NEW weapons.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> So what you're trying to say is wording means everything? Because I don't equate "damaged" to being broken, especially when the game WARNS me that my weapon is at risk of being "broken". And once I use up ALL durability and the weapon disappears, the game_ tells _me it's broken. Those mentions, just like the zora spears, are also reforged. How do you fix something that's not even in your inventory anymore? You don't. You make a new one.
> 
> So then I happen to use the game's wording of "broken" equating to durability reached 0.
> 
> So the Octorok trick can repair weapons, which is arguably debatable as I just threw in a near-broken dragonborne boko bat and got it back at the same condition. Perhaps it applies to certain weapons only. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that it can "repair" weapons, even if not all, but the only thing I can confirm is that if you throw in rusty gear it gives you NEW weapons.


Those mentions are repairs not reforgings. Damaged and broken are both synonyms. We could argue until the end of time but that doesn't change any of the facts. The ocktorock repairs broken or I'll use "damaged" weapons. IT HAS TO BE A ROCK OCKTOROCK. Not a regular one. That's most likely why you have mixed reports of it not working. The rock ocktorock resotres its duribility to the max and makes it "good as new" but not new. It's the same weapon.


----------



## s157 (Mar 14, 2017)

So you seem to be at a calmer mood now, I guess i'll rephrase my wording so that it can appease even you:

"Weapons, save for a select few unbreakables, cannot be fixed once they reach 0 durability. Certain weapons, notably the ones belonging to the champions, can be replicated exactly after the durability reaches 0, whether or not you can call this repairing is debatable."


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

s157 said:


> So you seem to be at a calmer mood now, I guess i'll rephrase my wording so that it can appease even you:
> 
> "Weapons, save for a select few unbreakables, cannot be fixed once they reach 0 durability. Certain weapons, notably the ones belonging to the champions, can be replicated exactly after the durability reaches 0, whether or not you can call this repairing is debatable."


Better. A lot better. "whether or not you can call this repairing is debatable." I guess. I'll call it repair since you can only do this once it's broken in the first place, but okay. Your god is appeased.


----------



## mimien (Mar 14, 2017)

Jim Sterling doing attention whore stuff... pathetic


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 14, 2017)

mimien said:


> Jim Sterling doing attention whore stuff... pathetic


i suppose you missed the entire thread and don't know really who he is.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 14, 2017)

It's starting again... I kinda wanna watch now.


----------



## naughty_cat (Mar 14, 2017)

I personally find this largely has to do with the fact that the Zelda series happens to be one of the few game series that for some people, has been elevated to an almost-religious status. Some people will just fall in love completely with anything that has the zelda logo slabbed on the cover, regardless of the quality of the content (Which I don't find to be a bad thing at all!, I'm like that myself when it comes to my favourite games   )... It's just like when you're in love with someone, despite of what people think of them... I don't think the backlash that anything to do with the numeric score as much as with Jim's comments. I'm sure that many hardcore fans out there actually felt genuinely offended by some of these comments... Sure everyone is entitled to say their opinions over the internet, but some times the truth hurts!


----------



## mimien (Mar 15, 2017)

ihaveamac said:


> i suppose you missed the entire thread and don't know really who he is.


More or less. I read the thread and to be honest I don't care if he got ddos'd I am not surprised either. My reaction was omg someone had to do a negative review of botw for summoning attention. I know he is somewhat famous but the attention he is getting because of this is drastically more than what he usually gets. And that's exactly what he wanted, a reaction. Which is why It makes me angry. It's like when you were a child at a party having a good time with your classmates and the bully of the school comes up and the first thing he does is an attention seeking maneuver. Does he review Nintendo things often? I searched Jim Sterling Nintendo on youtube and the results were showing he is a huge Nintendo bully. In fact I think the whole reason he is youtube popular is that he has been following the bully image make himself look cool and awesome. And I could keep going but let's what you or someone else have to say about this first.


----------



## CheatFreak47 (Mar 15, 2017)

mimien said:


> More or less. I read the thread and to be honest I don't care if he got ddos'd I am not surprised either. My reaction was omg someone had to do a negative review of botw for summoning attention. I know he is somewhat famous but the attention he is getting because of this is drastically more than what he usually gets. And that's exactly what he wanted, a reaction. Which is why It makes me angry. It's like when you were a child at a party having a good time with your classmates and the bully of the school comes up and the first thing he does is an attention seeking maneuver. Does he review Nintendo things often? I searched Jim Sterling Nintendo on youtube and the results were showing he is a huge Nintendo bully. In fact I think the whole reason he is youtube popular is that he has been following the bully image make himself look cool and awesome. And I could keep going but let's what you or someone else have to say about this first.



7/10 is hardly negative, first of all. If you think a 7/10 is worthy of attention, you're part of the problem as far as I'm concerned.

And no not really, he's not a bully for pointing out flaws in a large corporation who has directly wronged him.
In fact, the very definition of "bully" is inapplicable, because Sterling is the smaller, weaker entity.

He makes himself look awesome because he is, in fact, quite awesome.
Most of the time, at least.

The guy knows his shit basically, he's been writing and talking about video games for a living since at least 2009 if I recall correctly.

Ever heard of #FucKonami?
Sterling is the guy that started that, to my knowledge.

Edit:
A lot of his criticisms of Nintendo are essentially that they will abuse their power as a large corporation and step on the copyrights of smaller entities, like individual people, critics, let's players, youtubers- usually by abusing the DMCA system. However, when the tables are turned and people infringe their copyrights- for example, Emulation or Piracy of their products, it's not OK anymore and they attack that too.

He also hates how their virtual console system is utter trash, how they purposefully withhold supply to meet demand to artificially stimulate demand, stuff that they do as a corporation/console manufacturer that could be considered Anti-Consumer.

He picks on all corporations and companies that make stupid idiotic mistakes like this too- Not just Nintendo, for the record, but those are the basic outlines of the Nintendo specific content.


----------



## s157 (Mar 15, 2017)

People are free to dislike BotW. People are free to dislike those who _seem_ to dislike BotW. At least the general consensus here is that aside from a select few fervent worshippers of the game who think a 7/10 score is worthy of capital punishment, ddos-ing him is too far. Even many people who rate BotW highly agree on that, even though they dislike him as a person


----------



## naughty_cat (Mar 15, 2017)

CheatFreak47 said:


> He also hates how their virtual console system is utter trash, how they purposefully withhold supply to meet demand to artificially stimulate demand, stuff that they do as a corporation/console manufacturer that could be considered Anti-Consumer.



I believe the term "Anti-consumer" pretty much hits the spot... It's not just Nintendo... Anti-consumer maneuvers have become a trend amongst large video game corporations in recent years. Putting it that way: "how they purposefully withhold supply to meet demand to artificially stimulate demand" pretty much outlines the development history of games such as MGSV. The difference is that most of the successful gaming coportations would usually do their very best to hide their tracks... Others such as Nintendo and Konami have been becoming quite vulgar about it...

EDIT: I for one believe that Jim's (somewhat offensive) comments about BOTW might have been a lot friendlier had Nintendo followed a different, more friendly supply-and-demand policy along the past few years. I also believe that he might have actually given it a slightly higher score had it been developed and published by some kind of 3rd party game developer or something (and to clearly illustrate this analogy, I'd have to imagine that we're living in an alternative universe where it's the exact same game, but doesn't have the title "Zelda" and has no predecessors )


----------



## SNEAKxxATTACK (Mar 15, 2017)

The existence of the 'influential person argument' is so annoying. Especially people like this. He's not really that important. The biggest reaction that should be had is "oh you're an idiot," as a comment or just at the screen.

Anyway. I don't believe any normal person did this. Probably ninty.


----------



## naughty_cat (Mar 15, 2017)

SNEAKxxATTACK said:


> Anyway. I don't believe any normal person did this. Probably ninty.



I for one believe this to be 100% true, and I'd be willing to wager that it was purely because of the Metacritic score drop.


----------



## Molina (Mar 15, 2017)

SNEAKxxATTACK said:


> Anyway. I don't believe any normal person did this. Probably ninty.


Seems kinda too big but I get the idea. Look at the thread, just by explaining why the system is flawed and how Ninty could have done much more, a lot of people get triggered. So I think a -1 on Metacritic is able to trigger fanboy (and not just Ninty one, I remember a hell of hatred when Overwatch went down too).


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 15, 2017)

Holy crap, 6 pages in 24 hours and it's mostly 2 idiots throwing a fit that Jim didn't give the game a 10/10. what a pair of mooks! @netovsk (Redacted, Sorry @FierceDeityLinkMask) how do you sleep at night when you fight so hard to dissuade people from having their own opinions by presenting your own hypocritical opinions as cold hard facts? Or knowing that you are fighting fiercely to defend a practice that will undoubtedly contribute to a second Videogame market crash?


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 15, 2017)

Thelucario21 said:


> Holy crap, 6 pages in 24 hours and it's mostly 2 idiots throwing a fit that Jim didn't give the game a 10/10. what a pair of mooks! @netovsk and @FierceDeityLinkMask how do you sleep at night when you fight so hard to dissuade people from having their own opinions by presenting your own hypocritical opinions as cold hard facts? Or knowing that you are fighting fiercely to defend a practice that will undoubtedly contribute to a second Videogame market crash?


I don't recall ranting about Jim's review score. In fact I could care less if he did this for attention or not. I was arguing with someone else about something else almost entirely. I don't care about Nintendo as a business or their business practices because I believe that every non profit business will try to maximize money in any way they can, without giving a damn about who they step over. That includes Nintendo and any other video game company. How did you sleep after making such a retarded claim about me based on no evidence??? I don't give a damn if Jim didn't give Zelda a 10/10. I don't even watch the guy's videos.


----------



## s157 (Mar 15, 2017)

My argument over terms mostly with @FierceDeityLinkMask was irrelevant to the topic at hand and I'm quite ashamed about that. Not about my position, but for the fact it was out of topic. This thread is about Jim Sterling and the attacks he's been suffering due to his review.

These "cancerous" posts are normally relevant to the post, as the ones who are bashing Jim either believe he deserves it or that DDoS-ing him is too far even if he's a jerk. The ones who believe he deserve it however take it a step further and insult his character. But then again, if you look at many switch threads, they tend to get out of hand, speaking very lightly.

Just as people have the right to bash Jim, people have the right to defend him, and the right to do so should be respected on both sides. Personally I don't see how Jim's opinion should be relevant to you unless you agree with most of his reviews, thus insinuating that you can take his words more seriously. I agree with most of his reviews, though I believe he scored BotW a tad low, however his opinions have some impact on me. I also would consider myself a Zelda fan, having owned every physical copy of the game save for Zelda II and Link's Awakening. But moreso, I can respect his opinion that BotW is a good game, but not perfect even if I would rate it slightly higher as a "great" game.


----------



## FierceDeityLinkMask (Mar 15, 2017)

s157 said:


> My argument over terms mostly with @FierceDeityLinkMask was irrelevant to the topic at hand and I'm quite ashamed about that. Not about my position, but for the fact it was out of topic. This thread is about Jim Sterling and the attacks he's been suffering due to his review.
> 
> These "cancerous" posts are normally relevant to the post, as the ones who are bashing Jim either believe he deserves it or that DDoS-ing him is too far even if he's a jerk. The ones who believe he deserve it however take it a step further and insult his character. But then again, if you look at many switch threads, they tend to get out of hand, speaking very lightly.
> 
> Just as people have the right to bash Jim, people have the right to defend him, and the right to do so should be respected on both sides. Personally I don't see how Jim's opinion should be relevant to you unless you agree with most of his reviews, thus insinuating that you can take his words more seriously. I agree with most of his reviews, though I believe he scored BotW a tad low, however his opinions have some impact on me. I also would consider myself a Zelda fan, having owned every physical copy of the game save for Zelda II and Link's Awakening. But moreso, I can respect his opinion that BotW is a good game, but not perfect even if I would rate it slightly higher as a "great" game.


Well put.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 16, 2017)

Thelucario21 said:


> Holy crap, 6 pages in 24 hours and it's mostly 2 idiots throwing a fit that Jim didn't give the game a 10/10. what a pair of mooks! @netovsk and @FierceDeityLinkMask how do you sleep at night when you fight so hard to dissuade people from having their own opinions by presenting your own hypocritical opinions as cold hard facts? Or knowing that you are fighting fiercely to defend a practice that will undoubtedly contribute to a second Videogame market crash?



Are you just that much asinine to realize he can have its own shitty opinion as long as he isn't a metacritic reviewer and bring overall score down? That's the only real reason people are pissed off. They don't give a damn about his opinion, much less yours.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 16, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Are you just that much asinine to realize he can have its own shitty opinion as long as he isn't a metacritic reviewer and bring overall score down? That's the only real reason people are pissed off. They don't give a damn about his opinion, much less yours.


at this point I just think you're saying he has a shitty opinion because you disagree with his 7/10. metacritic is actually supportive of his work in the face of people asking for him to be taken off the site.

Failed to fetch tweet https://twitter.com/JimSterling/status/841633354298585088
Failed to fetch tweet https://twitter.com/JimSterling/status/841634192203141120


----------



## Subtle Demise (Mar 16, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Are you just that much asinine to realize he can have its own shitty opinion as long as he isn't a metacritic reviewer and bring overall score down? That's the only real reason people are pissed off. They don't give a damn about his opinion, much less yours.


Who cares about metacritic? I haven't read a game review beyond the comment section on private torrent sites. All these "professional reviewers" are just part of the pre-order hype machine.


----------



## VinsCool (Mar 16, 2017)

netovsk said:


> Are you just that much asinine to realize he can have its own shitty opinion as long as he isn't a metacritic reviewer and *bring overall score down?* That's the only real reason people are pissed off. They don't give a damn about his opinion, much less yours.


They're a bunch of butthurt idiots if they're pissed off about a score.


----------



## netovsk (Mar 16, 2017)

Subtle Demise said:


> Who cares about metacritic? I haven't read a game review beyond the comment section on private torrent sites. All these "professional reviewers" are just part of the pre-order hype machine.




How exactly do you think people try to sell or shove to others faces that uncharted, for instance, has to be a good game even if they never played a game on the series? If nobody really cared, publishers themselves wouldn't stamp game scores on the game's own cover and ads as a selling point. Of course score going down or up doesn't change my opinion of the game, since I've already played it through.


----------



## s157 (Mar 16, 2017)

That would be a more valid argument if his one score brought the overall score to like 75 or something. 97 instead of 98? Big deal. Anyone who hasn't played zelda and refuses to buy the game because of the metacritic score being 97 instead of 98 probably would not be in your list of people to recommend this game to. Good lord, you zelda zealots care too much about the opinion of one man who still enjoyed the game. 7/10 being an absolutely god awful review was bad enough, but 97/100 instead of 98 triggers you that much?


----------



## supergamer368 (Mar 16, 2017)

Shut the (PING) up you stupid Zelda fanboys. I like Zelda. But I'm not going to give death threats to a guy who gave a Zelda game a 7/10. And I know how "important" BotW is to the series, but come on. SHOULD BE HANGED FOR HIS OPINION?!?!?! ARE YOU KIDDING?!? ALL THE MAN DID WAS GIVE A VIDEO GAME AN OK REVIEW!!! I WOULD TAKE 7/10!!!!! IT'S NOT LIKE HE GOT UP AND STARTED SHOUTING MEANS THINGS ABOUT AMERICA IN FRONT OF THE WHITE HOUSE! EDIT: May I also add that reviews exist for people to give their thoughts on things! They aren't always positive! Oh, and 7/10 is _so _bad!


----------



## duwen (Mar 16, 2017)

Jim's follow up video on YT was perfect - coupling his personal opinion of the weapon durability in the game with the fanatics response to his review he said "right now you're all being so fucking precious, so fragile, that you should all be swords in Hyrule".

Pure gold.


----------



## Deleted User (Mar 17, 2017)

FierceDeityLinkMask said:


> I don't recall ranting about Jim's review score. In fact I could care less if he did this for attention or not. I was arguing with someone else about something else almost entirely. I don't care about Nintendo as a business or their business practices because I believe that every non profit business will try to maximize money in any way they can, without giving a damn about who they step over. That includes Nintendo and any other video game company. How did you sleep after making such a retarded claim about me based on no evidence??? I don't give a damn if Jim didn't give Zelda a 10/10. I don't even watch the guy's videos.


My bad, I apologize. speaking of off topic, can we get a mod in here to clean up the off topic bits? thanks!



netovsk said:


> How exactly do you think people try to sell or shove to others faces that uncharted, for instance, has to be a good game even if they never played a game on the series? If nobody really cared, publishers themselves wouldn't stamp game scores on the game's own cover and ads as a selling point. Of course score going down or up doesn't change my opinion of the game, since I've already played it through.


Oh yeah, like that makes it any better. you're going to have to try WAY harder to excuse the Doublethink you've been spouting since you got here. (If you don't know what Doublethink is, check TV Tropes, or just read "Nineteen Eighty-Four" and get educated)


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Mar 18, 2017)

Zelda review score
Salty tears melting snow flakes
Butthurt fanboys derp

I made this Haiku just for fun, just remember if you disagree with a review it's not the end of the world. I would rather some one give a game a low score and be pleasantly surprised, than to buy a game expecting 10 out 10 no need to buy any other games ever again, only to find out it's meh at best.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Mar 18, 2017)

serves him right I fucking hate youtuberz leeching off the public by doing fuck all and getting rich from it!


----------



## SaffronXL (Mar 20, 2017)

I find myself agreeing with every single point he makes, especially about framerate issues. Games have looked good enough for a while, why hinder emersion and playability for slightly better graphics.

BotW would be a better game if the graphics had been worse.


----------



## spiderman1216 (Mar 20, 2017)

WTF is wrong with our community, first harassing a woman over facial animations, now DDOSing reviewers over a video game.


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 20, 2017)

What was the facial animations thing? I missed that entirely.

Anyway the answer would be if you are going to have no real barrier to entry and be inclusive of everybody then you are going to have a few cunts in the mix as well.


----------



## Hi-Dro (Mar 20, 2017)

people who think Devs do not pay media outlets to "review" their games, are seriously deluded. 
Have you ever watched the news this is the corporate world and has been happening since even before Rise of the Robots and Driver 3 , there is evidence and proof that it happens. 
And its exactly this kind of thing that started the whole disgusting 'gamer gate community losers' spreading their sexist hate from behind the comforts of their keyboard. 
A community of delusional adults acting like children, for the sake of animation is pathetic.


----------



## invaderyoyo (Mar 21, 2017)

Well, looks like NicheGamer just gave BOTW a 7. Looking through the comments, I can see they're already getting crap.

Hope they don't ddos'd, too. I think they made some good points, but were a bit harsh towards the end.


----------



## coolpokemon (Mar 22, 2017)

you people know jim sterling likes to bait people right also in my opinion he shouldnt be a critic in metacritic in my opinion also i seen his videos and hes kind of biased to nintendo just stating my own opinion of him also i think he didnt get ddos he passably did this to himself on purpose for attention


----------



## Fronic (Mar 24, 2017)

Problem is, gamer "reviews" are opinions rather than criticisms. If all of you gamers defend people like Jim Sterling you are making gaming a terrible form of media because it can't be good by itself.


----------



## ihaveahax (Mar 24, 2017)

Fronic said:


> Problem is, gamer "reviews" are opinions rather than criticisms. If all of you gamers defend people like Jim Sterling you are making gaming a terrible form of media because it can't be good by itself.


I don't get what you're saying here. reviews always have opinions in them, not exclusive to Jim.


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 25, 2017)

I have serious problems with a lot of what were once dubbed "forum reviews", though I guess a new term has been invented. Rarely is it that I have problems with the intent (people genuinely seem to want to share their assessment of a work or item), though how neutral or not their position might be is a different matter and is actually part of my misgivings with scores -- it is hard to dishonestly write something, far easier to give a fluff score. Likewise there might be a slight correlation between "professional" (whatever that can be judged to be) and certain qualities and attributes that are useful but it is a fairly weak one, so much so that with the usual "if you saw a professional review in the street" test I could not justifiably assume it is going to be useful.

Opinions vs objective whatever is not necessarily a red herring but it does seem to be a distraction from whether a review is useful or not. There are some that might seek a purely objective assessment of things (are there graphics glitches, what sort, is the game able to be completed, for a reasonable reading of the story are there plot holes or notably unexplained events...), and such things have some merit for some things if they in turn avoid spoiling a story or something and I want such a mechanical assessment. If you are going to tell me the graphics are good we are in opinion country -- graphics design rules will probably generate something that works if you follow them, however stick some yellow text on a white background and where the player stops to decipher it they get snuck up on by a monster and you have good game design, or at least an attempt at it.

Beyond that I may want opinions. If nothing else it may give me a clue as to the likes of the reviewer and thus whether they align well with mine.

Short version. Try not to be an elitist prick, something good can come from anywhere.

Edit. Not necessarily a mindset I share but worth considering as part of all this


----------

