Hellsing321
Member
I think Gerstmann-gate would be the bigger controversy.beelzebozo said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Tom Chick: The Man Who Hated Deus Ex
- Thread starter Lost Fragment
- Start date
Alex Connolly
Member
I like reading and hearing what Tom Chick has to say, because I'm not looking for a validation of my own opinion. Unlike a fair portion of the herd masquerading as cutting edge GAF members, Tom Chick gives us interesting viewpoints and fairly different opinions to consider.
This "Tom Chick is a stooge, confirmed" nonsense is pathetic. I value the fact he supports a number of interesting underdog games that the masses don't get, don't like or don't see.
This "Tom Chick is a stooge, confirmed" nonsense is pathetic. I value the fact he supports a number of interesting underdog games that the masses don't get, don't like or don't see.
PowderedToast
Junior Member
tom chick is great, the industry needs more people with fresh viewpoints like him.
More Fun To Compute
Member
Tom Chick is very hit and miss for me. Sometimes he gets things right when most games writers get things very wrong but he is sometimes infuriating with the things he priorities in games and other things he doesn't seem care for at all. I agree that Timesplitters: Future Perfect wasn't given all the chances it deserves compared to similar games of the period but he falls squarely on the wrong side of the debate on Braid.
As an aside, I hope that this 10 years anniversary thing has got need to put Deus Ex on a pedestal out of some people's systems. Not everything needs to be about Deus Ex.
As an aside, I hope that this 10 years anniversary thing has got need to put Deus Ex on a pedestal out of some people's systems. Not everything needs to be about Deus Ex.
Strummerjones
Member
What an absolutely bizarre article. A man wrote a review of some videogame 10 years ago, and he didn't like it - let's relive those heady days!
The follow up should be an indepth celebration of when Kieron Gillen first dropped a Kenickie reference in an article. What did it mean to you? Can we ever go back?
The follow up should be an indepth celebration of when Kieron Gillen first dropped a Kenickie reference in an article. What did it mean to you? Can we ever go back?
Cat in the Hat
Member
:lolbeelzebozo said:
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
Brobzoid said:
I haven't played Alpha Protocol, but considering ME2 is not really even an RPG (and also kinda shitty), I'm willing to endorse the article nonetheless.
This also makes me want to play AP so much more.
beelzebozo
Jealous Bastard
usea said:
what's amusing is that, reading his list of overrated games of 2008, he just expresses a lot of things that i felt or thought about games that year but didn't bother to go out of my way to sit and type. it's as if some people refuse to believe that a person can hold an opinion that deviates slightly from what's popular without being a part of a conspiracy to pull down more ad money for their website.
MikeE21286
Member
I really can't stand Tom Chick. Just listening to him talk is just....ugh.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
I think Tom Chick is harsh and comes by it honestly. He gives his most honest opinions with no intended controversy or ad-money related tomfoolery attached, and it shows.
I may not agree with him about DX1 (I think the game is fucking brilliant), but he he's knowledgeable enough and talented enough to make me respect him despite concluding the review with an opinion I don't agree with in the least.
That said, I agree with him that Mass Effect 2 kind of sucks.
I may not agree with him about DX1 (I think the game is fucking brilliant), but he he's knowledgeable enough and talented enough to make me respect him despite concluding the review with an opinion I don't agree with in the least.
That said, I agree with him that Mass Effect 2 kind of sucks.
Neuromancer
Member
I put Tom Chick in the same boat as Michael Pachter- their capacity (and apparent willingness) to get certain members of the video game enthusiast community enraged is extremely pleasing to me.
MikeE21286
Member
Larsen B said:
I've only heard hiim from his appearances on the Joystiq podcast.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Zeliard said:
One thing I like about Christgau's reviews is that, yes, you're right, he's got his few pithy encapsulations, but often he doesn't even go that far. His work in service of brevity is amazing:
"Led Zeppelin - BBC Sessions [Atlantic, 1997]
""Tool - Aenima [Zoo, 1996] Dud"
"Radiohead - Pablo Honey [Capitol, 1993] "Creep" Choice Cut"
(I disagree with all three opinions, naturally, but it's so much more productive to just have a one off "Skip it" and save words for works that actually interest him)
Even some of his reviews don't make it longer than a line:
"Radiohead - In Rainbows [Purloined Datadisc, 2007] Developed in concert, hence more jammy, less songy and less Yorkey, which is good ("Jigsaw Falling Into Place," "Bodysnatchers"). **"
"Wu Tang Clan - Iron Flag [Loud, 2001] great-not-grand beats, worried raps about the ultimate value of the Wu and all its holdings ("Iron Flag," "Dashing [Reasons]") ***"
"Smashing Pumpkins - Gish [Caroline, 1991] if you can dig art-rock fantasia--and hey, why not?--this has a nice witchy wail to it ("Rhinoceros") *"
beelzebozo
Jealous Bastard
Clear said:
this is a total "chicken or the egg" question: does the author hold genuine dissenting opinions, express them in an eloquent critical fashion, and therefore accrue readers; or, does the author accrue readers by purporting to hold disingenuous dissenting opinions?
do you not see that the former is entirely possible and likely?
the result is ouroboros.
Red Blaster
Member
Stumpokapow said:One thing I like about Christgau's reviews is that, yes, you're right, he's got his few pithy encapsulations, but often he doesn't even go that far. His work in service of brevity is amazing:
"Led Zeppelin - BBC Sessions [Atlantic, 1997]
"Tool - Aenima [Zoo, 1996] Dud"
"Radiohead - Pablo Honey [Capitol, 1993] "Creep" Choice Cut"
(I disagree with all three opinions, naturally, but it's so much more productive to just have a one off "Skip it" and save words for works that actually interest him)
Even some of his reviews don't make it longer than a line:
"Radiohead - In Rainbows [Purloined Datadisc, 2007] Developed in concert, hence more jammy, less songy and less Yorkey, which is good ("Jigsaw Falling Into Place," "Bodysnatchers"). **"
"Wu Tang Clan - Iron Flag [Loud, 2001] great-not-grand beats, worried raps about the ultimate value of the Wu and all its holdings ("Iron Flag," "Dashing [Reasons]") ***"
"Smashing Pumpkins - Gish [Caroline, 1991] if you can dig art-rock fantasia--and hey, why not?--this has a nice witchy wail to it ("Rhinoceros") *"
Two favorite Christgau reviews:
Portishead - Dummy [Go! Discs/London, 1994] Sade for androids ("Sour Times," "Wandering Star") *
The Doors [Columbia, 1967] I admit that some of the tunes retain considerable nostalgic appeal, but there's no way I can get around it--Jim Morrison sounds like an asshole. B-
Neuromancer
Member
I've been reading Tom Chick's site for a while, and I have never gotten the impression that his critiques and praises are anything other than genuine. Like if he really liked Killzone 2, why would he lie about it just to get hits? It just doesn't make much sense. I do think he's prone to exaggeration for humor's sake sometime but that's part of what makes him so entertaining to read.beelzebozo said:
beelzebozo
Jealous Bastard
fully with you on that assessment, neuro.
Doesn't seem like chicken or the egg to me at all. You changed the order of words, but not the order of events. The only difference between the two scenarios is whether the author actually holds those opinions or only claims to (also in the first one you talk about writing style, but it seems tangential to your actual point).beelzebozo said:
Couldn't agree more. I've seen no reason to believe he is not sincere, and I've seen plenty of evidence to the contrary.Neuromancer said:
Mr. B Natural
Member
He sounds like the kind of person that believes the game has to sell itself to the reviewer, not the other way around.
So, in other words, he has no home here in hypesville.
So, in other words, he has no home here in hypesville.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
beelzebozo said:
No it isn't, because article writing isn't just about reporting facts, its about spinning an engaging story. The way the writer chooses to do this is up to them.
The common comment everyone seems to have about Chick's writing is that it is harsh. Harsh but fair say his proponents, and maybe he is - but I don't have to like that approach.
Harshness is cheap in criticism. Its very easy to be nit-picky and cynical.
I'm sorry but I just don't find it admirable to be a "harsh" critic. I'd rather have insights than insults, even if taking the high-road means its harder to write entertaining copy.
Hari Seldon
Member
I like Tom Chick on his frequent appearances on the Three Moves Ahead podcast. However I don't share his opinion on popular games (i.e. non-strategy games). While I like him and appreciate his opinion, it is my opinion that he often loses the big picture when reviewing games, and tends to focus on the minutia on too many occasions. That said he is still one of the best reviewers out there.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, the important thing, to me at least, to take away from the article is that it's unimportant to distinguish whether you like him or his style that much in as much as it is to challenge the critiques made more than the score. We can have a back and forth all day on whether or not Mr. Chick is a breath of fresh air, or an attention whore devoid of real insight. However, the crux of this is that readers who disagree with his assessment of Deus Ex (or any other game for that matter) should be trying to engage in a dialogue with him about what was actually stated about Deus Ex.Clear said:
Mind you, I get your point. I'm just saying that, in this particularly instance, presuppositions about Tom Chick and/or Deus Ex are counterproductive.
BudokaiMR2
Member
Yeah I have no idea who Tom Chick is, but I have basically never been interested in stupid review drama and haven't read single video game review in years. I see the random scores thrown around on GAF and just laugh a bit to myself when people argue over them.
Deus Ex is awesome shit though. I still need to do a complete playthrough though
Oh and holy shit at mentioning poorly optimized engines and then using Alpha Protocol as an example of the opposite. I kinda sorta enjoyed that game but it was one of the buggiest experiences I have had in a lonnnnng time.
Deus Ex is awesome shit though. I still need to do a complete playthrough though
Oh and holy shit at mentioning poorly optimized engines and then using Alpha Protocol as an example of the opposite. I kinda sorta enjoyed that game but it was one of the buggiest experiences I have had in a lonnnnng time.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Never heard of this infamous review, although it reminds me that I gave Deus Ex a mere three out of four stars back when I was a freelance reviewer as well. I have no idea what I wrote and it seems to be entirely lost to internet history. I'm curious but it might also embarrass the shit out of me.
John Rabbit
Banned
YOU FILTHY MOTHERFU--Flavius said:
¬_¬Flavius said:
fine.
Steve Youngblood
Member
He didn't say it was optimized. He said the game better understood its limitations.BudokaiMR2 said:
ZephyrFate
Banned
He's a giant blimp fatass.Gravijah said:
way more
Member
Next week on GAF's new features "things that made us mad," Apple says it has a way to win the hearts of casual computer users but will a art deco computer really sell?
This has been "Things That Made us Mad," where we re-examine past events that weren't interesting the first time around.
This has been "Things That Made us Mad," where we re-examine past events that weren't interesting the first time around.
Clear said:
Your post has already been commented on, but this is a truly bizarre post to me. Huh? Critics of all forms tend to be hated. Criticism is harsh. You're picking apart somebody's work and detailing its failings. There's no other way of doing it.
I suppose you could adopt the fanzine approach the industry embraces so much, but that's a "How awesome is your game?" approach. There's no insight provided in that.
There's really no middle ground. People just get butt hurt by Chick because they make games sacred cows and take legit criticism personally when he's talking about platform exclusives.
charlequin
Banned
stupei said:
I think it's self-evident that a "perfect score" (or rather, the best score available on any given scale) doesn't mean that the product is literally without flaws, perfect in every conceivable way. But what is problematic about the use of such scores now:
- They're handed out with a great frequency, representing not great games of all time but just games that happen to be pretty good in a given year -- completely erasing the possibility of all-time classics and unique, shining high-points from the discourse. (There isn't a "one of the best films of all time" every year, and I don't see why games should be different.)
- They're not given equally to titles based on some manner of objective, in-context ranking of their perceived quality, but instead given pretty much exclusively to AAA games with huge budgets that are seen as particularly polished. (Imagine, say, Pirates of the Caribbean being given the highest ranking available by every film critic just because it's a polished action movie with appealing actors.)
- They're given to titles that aren't just flawed, but are flawed in manifest ways, significant ways that the audience for these titles would presumably want to know about in order to judge their purchase -- but these ways are papered over in favor of a judgment of a surface-level "experience" with the game.
Look at some of the titles on his list. GTA4, Mass Effect, and Spore are all notable for their post-release backlash. Why? Well, in part because all three games have glossy, appealing presentation and great "high concepts" that were praised effusively before release, yet all three have significant, glaring flaws in terms of their actual gameplay -- flaws that didn't necessarily ruin these titles for everyone, but which were certainly quite significant and reduced the enjoyment of many people playing these titles. This is ultimately what the "anti-10" issue is about -- the reviews of GTA4 were almost universally useless in actually extracting worthwhile information about the game, to the detriment of many buyers, and this issue is driven by the tendency to treat game reviews as paid advertisements rather than serious, honest descriptions of the title's positives and flaws.
Clear said:
Would you disagree that there are more works whose good points are fairly obvious but whose flaws require examination than vice versa?
Neuromancer
Member
Brevity is the soul of wit, or so its been said :lolDance In My Blood said:
Dance In My Blood said:
A review that sums it up in two words is pretty impressive. There have been plenty of fads that sold tens of millions. Fad doesn't mean failure. And it doesn't change the fact that like most fads, it's a gimmick. Why? Wii Fit is an awful approach to getting in shape. Think he nailed it pretty well.
BishopLamont
Banned
Gaming journalism is such a boring subject.
You can't be serious.1-D_FTW said: