Zero Punctuation Top 5s...

[Ian Skippy]

How does that change your accusation of me being conceited in my expression of criticism on the reviewer?

You first named me specifically and accused me of catering to MP as the my largest point of concern, then proceed to make a general statement about people being conceited in pretending that their personal largest point of concern is the actual "big issue" ?

Do we need an interpreter here for the language barrier?

I am not sure if we're going to need an interpreter, but we might. To me 'conceited' is a personality trait, like arrogance. You either are or you are not. In my view you are not conceited, but I do disagree with your criticism that he ignored the most important issue, for I feel there is no single one. You did claim otherwise, and I did found that silly. Beyond that, the more possible perspectives there are, the less useful it seems to me to have a review adress each. As long as the info given isn't factually false I believe giving an impression, based on a personal perspective, of a multi-faceted subject is a fair approach. People will tend to gravitate towards people that share that perspective, and thats where the usefulness of the review comes from.

Anyway, if you found it persoanlly offensive I called that line silly, please do accept my apologies. But I didn't call anyone conceited, and I do have to stress the difference. For the record.

 

[aRtFuL]

I think the people who don't like ED (from waht I can see from the from posts) came to ED with the expectation of "WoW in Space" or "Archeage in Space", and that's where the problem lies...

If you don't like space, spaceflight, astronomy, etc or any of the space science thing to start off with you will probably never like this game. It requires a certain love of space itself to like ED, unlike SC which is a bit more mmo populist (more like watching a space opera movie).

 

[Soothsayer]

This.

In my 500+ hours of Elite, I haven't once felt the need to grind for anything. I've got an A rated Asp and a mostly maxed out Clipper but those mostly stay docked. I'm a Duke with the empire and I didn't just sit there spamming charity missions. Currently I'm happy bombing around in my Viper mk.IV, pirating and working the background sim. I've got enough credits for around a dozen re-buys on my current set up and simply enjoy flying a space ship in a very immersive environment.

I think the people that get burned out and gripe about how shallow the game is, are the ones who's only goals are to have the biggest and most expensive ships as fast as possible. Of course it's going to feel like a "grind" to do that. Simply put though, you don't NEED the biggest and most expensive ship to enjoy Elite. If you think it's boring and shallow in a viper, why would the game suddenly be more exciting in a Cutter? Maybe slow down and use your imagination. Gasp.

I'd be curious to hear the thoughts of those who scoff at the imagination bit, when it comes to a book.

Omg, why would I use my imagination instead of just reading through as fast as I can? These books are so shallow! All they are is words on a page, and if you've seen one page of words, it's the same as all the others.... I did all that and then when I got to the end, it's just blank!

I guess patience is a rare commodity in a world now based off of instant gratification.

Just because you're happy flying around in lower-tier ships doesn't mean everyone wants to stay in them for months and months on end. I'd also bother to explain why Elite is indeed an incredibly shallow game (right up to Horizons), but the evidence honestly speaks for itself. Stations, landing pads, hangars, combat zones, resource extraction sites... There's a jarring sense of sameness to everything, and the game fundamentally lacks many particularly engaging features from the ground up.

Elite isn't a bad game, but you're in utter denial if you dispute the fact that it's an inch deep. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that I'm flying around in 550 million credit Anaconda from the money I made at Robigo is giving me more fun than I've ever had in ED. Not sure how long I'll remain hooked, but the fact that I have the financial freedom to purchase and kit ships for specific tasks as I see fit instead of being hit by ludicrous credit barriers is pretty liberating -- and, in turn, fun.

 

[GluttonyFang]

I am not sure if we're going to need an interpreter, but we might. To me 'conceited' is a personality trait, like arrogance. You either are or you are not. In my view you are not conceited, but I do disagree with your criticism that he ignored the most important issue, for I feel there is no single one. You did claim otherwise, and I did found that silly. Beyond that, the more possible perspectives there are, the less useful it seems to me to have a review adress each. As long as the info given isn't factually false I believe giving an impression, based on a personal perspective, of a multi-faceted subject is a fair approach. People will tend to gravitate towards people that share that perspective, and thats where the usefulness of the review comes from.

Anyway, if you found it persoanlly offensive I called that line silly, please do accept my apologies. But I didn't call anyone conceited, and I do have to stress the difference. For the record.

Being conceited is a part of human nature, yes, however there are relative extents of it that are deemed acceptable or unacceptable to society's whitewashing. Indulging in the joy of killing humans is an unacceptable extent in most cases other than war's justification, as an example.

The issue lies in that you believe I think the reviewer in question ignored the "most important question." As I have pointed out in the 35th post. To me, all issues have importance, and to pick one being the most important usually falls into an endless, extremely subjective debate that bears no productivity.

People that gravitate toward homogeneous traits/properties of matters is natural, however, we must remember that what's similar/comfortable to one is readily foreign/irrelevant to another, which is why reviews should be evaluating the subjects of review in multiple facets that provide information for as much of its advertised audience as possible.

Edit:

Before someone bait the moderator in, I'm not calling veteran/military personnel psycho killers or any demeaning names of any sort, merely using the example for certain people that direct their need to satisfy their violent tendency through a relatively "legal" mean. Any attempt to play strawman with my example or to make my example anything other than my intended purpose is simply a misunderstanding or like I said, a strawman.

 

[mossfoot]

Oh for the love of God... YOU'RE BOTH PRETTY!

 

[GluttonyFang]

Oh for the love of God... YOU'RE BOTH PRETTY!

I swear I cannot get through this forum for one day without getting into some sort of an argument...

Something must be wrong with people on this forum...

It must be them...

I am too perfect to be flawed...

*Chuckles in the background*

 

[Kayweg]

Then what you're suggesting multiplayer is of less significance, which already implies heavy bias.

A review is to point out a game's merits and flaws.

Doing only the former if circle-jerking, doing only the latter is pointless bashing.

Doing both in relative balance is what constitutes a review.

Edit:

If you like the reviewer, you are perfectly entitled to promote his/her work, but be ready to face the flaw of the reviewer in comparison to the purpose of a critic of a game, instead of a promotion of a game, or hating on the game.

I do like the reviewer, but that's more because of the format than the actual review of the games. Although he does usually nail the key points, for full game info i look elsewhere.
Zero Punctuation, that's his gig. Fast moving, frantic, direct, rude, no punches pulled.
Not a reviewer in the traditional sense, covering all aspects and details of the games he "reviews" in a methodical way. Or trying to be fair or "politically correct", god forbid.
Yahtzee isn't PC Gamer, and he doesn't try to be.
He likes ED, and i think his regular viewers will have a good understanding of why he does so.
You don't have to agree with all his stuff, i know i don't.
But gosh, he has provided me with many side splitting moments over the years. ZP is my absolute "must watch" every week.
And believe me, he has utterly murdered a number of my favorite games.

 

[Apos]

I swear I cannot get through this forum for one day without getting into some sort of an argument...

Something must be wrong with people on this forum...

It must be them...

I am too perfect to be flawed...

*Chuckles in the background*

Well, most people don't know it takes just the correct touch at your belly and you're at their mercy.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Well, most people don't know it takes just the correct touch at your belly and you're at their mercy.

This is very true and I approve of this message!

 

[Argus Leadhead]

Just because you're happy flying around in lower-tier ships doesn't mean everyone wants to stay in them for months and months on end. I'd also bother to explain why Elite is indeed an incredibly shallow game (right up to Horizons), but the evidence honestly speaks for itself. Stations, landing pads, hangars, combat zones, resource extraction sites... There's a jarring sense of sameness to everything, and the game fundamentally lacks many particularly engaging features from the ground up.

Elite isn't a bad game, but you're in utter denial if you dispute the fact that it's an inch deep. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that I'm flying around in 550 million credit Anaconda from the money I made at Robigo is giving me more fun than I've ever had in ED. Not sure how long I'll remain hooked, but the fact that I have the financial freedom to purchase and kit ships for specific tasks as I see fit instead of being hit by ludicrous credit barriers is pretty liberating -- and, in turn, fun.

Ok, read my second post now. I addressed that yes, I'd like new feature too. I'm not in denial of anything. It's true you don't NEED the biggest or most expensive ship to enjoy the game and if one applies some imagination and other reasoning than "I want the most expensive ship!" The game is quite enjoyable even in small ships. Did I say it wasn't fun in big ships for everyone? No. Just for me.

I never once mentioned that people may or may not WANT to fly bigger ships; only that by diving into a self-inflicted grind do they easily get burned out. Simple observations on what I've generally seen happen and no reason to get ones panties in a twist.

Does it apply to every single player? Nope. But it is a generalization.

I think what I also said along the lines of if the game is boring for someone in a viper, why would it be any more exciting in a cutter rings true. For everyone? No, I have no way of knowing every single persons gameplay preferences any more than you do.

If I didn't say thinks like "I think" or "In my opinion" then sure you could try to grill me for saying it applies to everyone but that's pretty far from where I personally stand here. That's the whole point of me saying those things. My thoughts, my opinions. Don't like them? Oh well, no skin off of my back.

I stated what I, Argus Leadhead, enjoy as well as some observations and thoughts on why people may find the game "grindy" and "boring" and "shallow". Nothing more, nothing less.


I'm curious though, without playing horizons, how are you qualified to say it's shallow? Just wondering. Your posts in other threads seemed to point at you not being willing to get it at this time.

Have you tried it yet? Or are you just talking about things you have no experience with?

 

[GluttonyFang]

I do like the reviewer, but that's more because of the format than the actual review of the games. Although he does usually nail the key points, for full game info i look elsewhere.
Zero Punctuation, that's his gig. Fast moving, frantic, direct, rude, no punches pulled.
Not a reviewer in the traditional sense, covering all aspects and details of the games he "reviews" in a methodical way. Or trying to be fair or "politically correct", god forbid.
Yahtzee isn't PC Gamer, and he doesn't try to be.
He likes ED, and i think his regular viewers will have a good understanding of why he does so.
You don't have to agree with all his stuff, i know i don't.
But gosh, he has provided me with many side splitting moments over the years. ZP is my absolute "must watch" every week.
And believe me, he has utterly murdered a number of my favorite games.

Right, and I appreciate his unconventional approach, which is why I am subscribed to him and watch his every video.

However, due to his unconventional approach, people reserve the right to point out what he misses.

For example, his review on Evolve was quite informative, he touched on the point of inept single player AI of being "too competent," and that match making system in multi-player is quite painful to deal with. Along with the DLC issues. This is an example of a relatively balanced review where he reserves his style and preference on anti-multiplayer (his mention of wanting to be the monster and evolve into the final stage to take revenge against the humans that drag him into the multiplayer experience [and then get picked as the trapper 4 times in a row despite being last on his preference list/monster leaves room and he doesn't get to become the monster]) while providing a relatively multi-faceted review that informed the potential customers of what they're getting themselves into.

 

[NecoMachina]

Don't you find it interesting that you more or less find this very line in most topics being discussed? Makes it somewhat... meaningless.

Huh?!? I hear that tons of people eat and sleep daily too. Is that meaningless? Seems to me that it's just the opposite. The more something gets said, the more significant it's likely to be.

*Edit* Read your later posts and believe I understand your point now. Makes more sense...

 

[Gédéon_Lecanard]

Just because you're happy flying around in lower-tier ships doesn't mean everyone wants to stay in them for months and months on end. I'd also bother to explain why Elite is indeed an incredibly shallow game (right up to Horizons), but the evidence honestly speaks for itself. Stations, landing pads, hangars, combat zones, resource extraction sites... There's a jarring sense of sameness to everything, and the game fundamentally lacks many particularly engaging features from the ground up.

Elite isn't a bad game, but you're in utter denial if you dispute the fact that it's an inch deep. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that I'm flying around in 550 million credit Anaconda from the money I made at Robigo is giving me more fun than I've ever had in ED. Not sure how long I'll remain hooked, but the fact that I have the financial freedom to purchase and kit ships for specific tasks as I see fit instead of being hit by ludicrous credit barriers is pretty liberating -- and, in turn, fun.

I do dispute the so-called "fact" that it's shallow, and take it from someone who gets bored easily. We just don't have the same expectations. For instance, just reading about you having fun in a 550 millions Annie made me yawn to death. Elite is many things as an entertainment, and a wonderful support to imagination. Sure, it does not tell much of a story, nor does it take you for a ride in a roller coaster (= adventure on rails). When talking about entertainment anyway, "shallow" is one of the most subjective adjectives possible. The reasons why *you* find it to be shallow are your own, and are perfectly understandable. But then name games you don't find shallow, and I'm sure you'll find people to tell you otherwise, with perfectly reasonable arguments as well.

 

[Willa Allason]

I was going to post about this too. It might surprise the "THIS GAME IS HORRIBLE" crowd. But the game is good, just not everyone gets it.

 

[John Shepard]

I was going to post about this too. It might surprise the "THIS GAME IS HORRIBLE" crowd. But the game is good, just not everyone gets it.

Agreed mostly with your statement. In the end, we'll see what the market makes of it in the long run. Best way for a product to be tested is through competition. And sci-fi fans have much to look forward this year.

 

[Zeeman]

Thought this was a"Top5 List" of the most poorly punctuated ED rant posts. I am disappoint.

Z...

 

[shadragon]

Oh for the love of God... YOU'RE BOTH PRETTY!

I can't read this and NOT give you rep. LOL

 

[who?]

Haven't played many of those 15 games, but I wholeheartedly agree with ED and Witcher 3 being excellent (the ending I finished up with really struck me.. a massive kick in the moral bone. Nice to have a game that actually has an emotional impact and repercussions for your actions - ED certainly doesn't).

And AC Syndicate being one of the blandest, God yes. I love the series, and I'm really trying to like the game, but it's just soooooo bland. The protagonists have no real back-story, there's not much of a story. The action is really repetitive (even by the standards of the series). The city is spread out to allow for carriages, but mean it's less interesting to navigate on foot. Almost everything in the game is utterly gimped to make it too easy even for a blind dead person with no body who's looking the other way, while sneezing. Too easy = dull. And for me London in the 1800s just doesn't have the appeal of revolutionary Paris, or piracy in the Caribbean, or Constantinople, or Venice & Florence, or the "Holy Land". Sneaking around castles in Jerusalem, or getting into brawls in one of many almost identical warehouses in Southwark... tough call. The villian is good, that's nice.

 

[Kayweg]

Right, and I appreciate his unconventional approach, which is why I am subscribed to him and watch his every video.

However, due to his unconventional approach, people reserve the right to point out what he misses.

For example, his review on Evolve was quite informative, he touched on the point of inept single player AI of being "too competent," and that match making system in multi-player is quite painful to deal with. Along with the DLC issues. This is an example of a relatively balanced review where he reserves his style and preference on anti-multiplayer (his mention of wanting to be the monster and evolve into the final stage to take revenge against the humans that drag him into the multiplayer experience [and then get picked as the trapper 4 times in a row despite being last on his preference list/monster leaves room and he doesn't get to become the monster]) while providing a relatively multi-faceted review that informed the potential customers of what they're getting themselves into.

I rather suspected you'd be familiar with ZP, didn't mean to lecture you.
I would have to re-watch the Evolve review to comment on that particular bit, a game i have no experience with btw.
You made your point though, so i won't have to.
But i did re-watch the ED review, just for good measure.
There's quite a bit of criticism in it too (which, admittedly, is presented far less harsh than in games he DOESN'T like), and twice he points out that the game takes a bit of "acquired taste" by calling himself "...a weirdo who likes this sort of thing".
I agree that he possibly could have pointed out other things as well, but personally i don't feel that it's an outright "rose tinted" or heavily unbalanced review.
Alas, we've arrived at opinions now, about a guy who's reviews are nothing if not heavily opinionated.

 

[Futuristic Kung Fu]

I suppose I should watch it!