Hellsing321
Member
I think Gerstmann-gate would be the bigger controversy.beelzebozo said:i imagine in a decade we'll have an article titled, "jeff gerstmann: the man who thought twilight princess was just 'really pretty damn good'"
I think Gerstmann-gate would be the bigger controversy.beelzebozo said:i imagine in a decade we'll have an article titled, "jeff gerstmann: the man who thought twilight princess was just 'really pretty damn good'"
Hellsing321 said:I think Gerstmann-gate would be the bigger controversy.
:lolbeelzebozo said:i imagine in a decade we'll have an article titled, "jeff gerstmann: the man who thought twilight princess was just 'really pretty damn good'"
Clear said:Snarky, deliberately controversial critics -in any field- are like Z-list celebs, they draw a lot of attention despite having very little discernible talent.
Which is why I personally hold them in contempt.
It's too bad that the main appeal of Uncharted 2 is merely as a shooter. Having played through the story once, I have no desire to revisit it. There are too few memorable moments and not enough meaningful character interaction.- Tom Chick
I'm going to assume you think Tom Chick belongs in that group.Clear said:Snarky, deliberately controversial critics -in any field- are like Z-list celebs, they draw a lot of attention despite having very little discernible talent.
Which is why I personally hold them in contempt.
Brobzoid said:WHY, I HAVE JUST THE ARTICLE FOR YOU!!!
usea said:I'm going to assume you think Tom Chick belongs in that group.
Other than disagreeing with him, what leads you to believe he is deliberately controversial? You're accusing him of being dishonest here. What are you basing that on?
Neuromancer said: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 said:I really can't stand Tom Chick. Just listening to him talk is just....ugh.
Larsen B said:What?!
The Qt3 podcasts are some of the best around!
(Though that may have more to do with Kelly Wand than Tom)
Zeliard said:It would be amusing to see a Christgau in the gaming industry, laying down extremely pithy summarizations of entire works.
beelzebozo 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.
Clear said:Of course its not a conspiracy, its just entertainment.
*All writers want to be read*, and in a field that's as crowded as games journalism it helps to have a style or approach that stands out.
It also pays better.
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") *"
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: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.
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: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?
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: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: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.
Are you trying to tell me that I might need to play another game after GTA IV? Because GTA IV was so great that I wouldn't need to play another game again?Twig said:Tom Chick is far more insightful, even in his harshness, than the type of people who do nothing but espouse the greatness of this or that blockbuster.
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: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.
YOU FILTHY MOTHERFU--Flavius said:Tom's great at writing about games.
¬_¬Flavius said:Oh wait, excuse me...
In my opinion, Tom's great at writing about games.
He didn't say it was optimized. He said the game better understood its limitations.BudokaiMR2 said: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.
He's a giant blimp fatass.Gravijah said:oh, had to use the word "bigger" huh
is it because he's "bigger"
HUH???
Clear 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.
stupei said:I don't know. Creating a list around the idea that giving something 10/10 while it still has flaws -- ie. the assumption that all scales perceive 10 as perfection when that is clearly not the case -- is the intellectual equivalent of, "Well if you love that game so much, why don't you marry it!"
Clear said:I'm sorry but I just don't find it admirable to be a "harsh" critic.
The hard hitting dissection of Wii Fit by Tom Chickcharlequin said:Would you disagree that there are more works whose good points are fairly obvious but whose flaws require examination than vice versa?
6) Wii Fit
Wii fad.
Brevity is the soul of wit, or so its been said :lolDance In My Blood said:The hard hitting dissection of Wii Fit by Tom Chick
It's all in the delivery.Dance In My Blood said:The hard hitting dissection of Wii Fit by Tom Chick
Dance In My Blood said:The hard hitting dissection of Wii Fit by Tom Chick
You can't be serious.1-D_FTW 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.