surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I bet there was a panic in the ew offices where someone said 'quick! We need a worst game if the year! What do we do??' 'use this it's just some wii game nobody cares about'
Ok. First I understand that some people may hate cuteness. But the worst game of the year is a B+?! What is this?! The best year for video games of all time?! All other games are A- or higher? Iron Man 2 is a A- ?!
Anyway:
Anyway:
for a magazine called Entertainment Weekly they are doing a bad job promoting the video game entertainment industry.
I guess they should just stick to movies for another few years.
I guess they should just stick to movies for another few years.
Assassin's Creed II - 4.5/10
Deadly Premonition - 10/10
I guess you could argue that Jim has consistently shitty taste.
Deadly Premonition - 10/10
I guess you could argue that Jim has consistently shitty taste.
Then again it doesn't really matter what you say about games either, Jim. Especially since you're a hypocrite calling identifying someone else as a hypocrite.
Off the top of my head...
Dead Space: Ignition
Prison Break
Iron Man 2
Saw II
Army of Two: The 40th Day
Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II
Oh, and uh... Grease. The game. There was a game about the movie Grease. Let's not forget that.
Dead Space: Ignition
Prison Break
Iron Man 2
Saw II
Army of Two: The 40th Day
Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II
Oh, and uh... Grease. The game. There was a game about the movie Grease. Let's not forget that.
Why did you post about this twice? Its a magazine dedicated to celebrities with gaming as an afterthought, who cares what they think.
Epic Yarn was crap so I'm not surprised someone out there would consider the worse game they've played all year.
Epic Yarn was crap so I'm not surprised someone out there would consider the worse game they've played all year.
"Does it really matter what EW thinks about games?"
It would seem so, as you've written about it twice in as many days.
It would seem so, as you've written about it twice in as many days.
This magazine is getting WAY too much attention due to this BS. I'm all for criticizing something so blatantly stupid, but I can't help but wonder if this is maybe just a deliberate attempt to get a bit more publicity.
Alternatively, I heard that Call of Duty: Black Ops took home Best Game of the Year honors because OMG GUNNNZZZZZ
I don't understand the point of posting an article about this. It seems awfully petty. The only way this would have any legs were if the two articles referenced in Entertainment Weekly were by the same author, but that was never mentioned.
I remember one of the editors on Destructoid posting about how much they were enjoying Final Fantasy XIII a few months ago, and then Sterling posted his extremely negative review of the same title. No one cared about that, nor should they care about this.
This is really a very sad attempt to crucify another publication for having a different opinion, which is odd given that Sterling's supporters are always quick to champion his right to an opinion, even when it varies drastically from the norm. Strange stuff.
I remember one of the editors on Destructoid posting about how much they were enjoying Final Fantasy XIII a few months ago, and then Sterling posted his extremely negative review of the same title. No one cared about that, nor should they care about this.
This is really a very sad attempt to crucify another publication for having a different opinion, which is odd given that Sterling's supporters are always quick to champion his right to an opinion, even when it varies drastically from the norm. Strange stuff.
There is no controversy. Adam B. Vary reviewed it originally, and Jeff Jenson picked the Worst Game of the Year. Different people, different tastes. This uproar over nothing is stupid.
So this is ironic right? Cause some well known destructoid writers complain that people compare review scores even though they are from different reviewers, saying its proof of incompetence. Yet now we have lazy "games journalist" here making the same lame argument?
Or was it just not worth the time to see if two different people contribute to the two different scores. Talk about lazy, hypocritical, or just stupid.
Or was it just not worth the time to see if two different people contribute to the two different scores. Talk about lazy, hypocritical, or just stupid.
So this is ironic right? Cause some well known destructoid writers complain that people compare review scores even though they are from different reviewers, saying its proof of incompetence. Yet now we have lazy "games journalist" here making the same lame argument?
Or was it just not worth the time to see if two different people contribute to the two different scores. Talk about lazy, hypocritical, or just stupid.
Or was it just not worth the time to see if two different people contribute to the two different scores. Talk about lazy, hypocritical, or just stupid.
"However, is it entertaining to laugh at what EW thinks about games? Absolutely!"
Plus it allows you to repeatedly post about irrelevant news for cheap hits! :D
Plus it allows you to repeatedly post about irrelevant news for cheap hits! :D
It's hilarious, Sterling, who's made a career out of griefing fans of particular games is getting griefed by a low score on a game he likes. Anyone else seeing the irony of sterling getting his panties in a bunch over this?
That honestly makes no sense. How can something rated a B+ be the worst game of the year, yet you rate other games lower? I know rating is supposed to be subjective and self contained, but that honestly makes no sense.
Loved Epic Yarn. Luckily I don't pay much attention to a publication aimed at hags.
It's one thing to have an OPINION and that's fine. It's another to try and judge things objectively and tally up the points based on what the game does right for it's intentions.
Jim, there is nothing wrong with you pointing and amusing yourself. Others see it as a waste, but hey, perhaps it was just a bit slow, and what's the harm?
Just anooother day.
It's one thing to have an OPINION and that's fine. It's another to try and judge things objectively and tally up the points based on what the game does right for it's intentions.
Jim, there is nothing wrong with you pointing and amusing yourself. Others see it as a waste, but hey, perhaps it was just a bit slow, and what's the harm?
Just anooother day.
Man, no wonder fanboys rage over a difference of a few tenths of a point. When your worst game of the year is a B+, every little bit counts.
Jim Sterling is the worst journalist because he's too honest. See what I did there?
Just in case, I'll give it another shot.
Apple is the worst company because they're too innovative.
Just in case, I'll give it another shot.
Apple is the worst company because they're too innovative.
Yeah, I mentioned this review yesterday in the comment to the other story.
It's probably just a case of different writers though, but it still looks a bit silly.
Besides, even if there are different writers, there are still some problems.
There are two scenarios, way I see it:
1) The writer who posted this review was involved in the choosing of worst game of the year and had no problem with Kirby 'winning'
or 2) the writer who did the worst game of the year did not actually consult the writer of the review and did it all himself. I don't think they have many video game reviewers over there, so you'd figure they could consult all of them for a story like that.
(@Destructoid: I imagine that you consulted at least some of your writers when posting the game of the year a couple of days ago? Maybe not all, but you probably have more game writers than EW)
I think we can agree that neither of these are very good scenarios.
It's probably just a case of different writers though, but it still looks a bit silly.
Besides, even if there are different writers, there are still some problems.
There are two scenarios, way I see it:
1) The writer who posted this review was involved in the choosing of worst game of the year and had no problem with Kirby 'winning'
or 2) the writer who did the worst game of the year did not actually consult the writer of the review and did it all himself. I don't think they have many video game reviewers over there, so you'd figure they could consult all of them for a story like that.
(@Destructoid: I imagine that you consulted at least some of your writers when posting the game of the year a couple of days ago? Maybe not all, but you probably have more game writers than EW)
I think we can agree that neither of these are very good scenarios.
So really, the story from yesterday should have been titled, "Worst game that I played this year," written by one particular guy. I had suspicions.
I know people are entitled to opinions... but sometimes you have to at least TRY to use your brain. If I was to post a story about the worst game of the year, first, I might check what my company wrote about it to avoid confusing readers. And to be completely honest... if the game I chose for worst game of the year has more than 80% at gamerankings and metacritic, I would at least give a better reason than "it's too cute".
There are a lot of angry people in here... you guys know that destructoid is a blog...right? These people are bloggers... they can post whatever they want. That's what a blog is.
There are a lot of angry people in here... you guys know that destructoid is a blog...right? These people are bloggers... they can post whatever they want. That's what a blog is.
Still pretty inconsistent, but that review isn't by the guy who claimed it to be the worst game of 2010.
EW actually meant to say "The worst,amazing cute game, sure to put a smile on your face, game of the year"...maybe?
Very similiar to what happened to Saints Row 2 in 2008.
According to wikipedia Entertainment Weekly flagged the game as "racist, misogynistic, crude, cynical, humorless and stupid" and labelled it the worst game of 2008, despite previously giving the game a B and calling it "a larcenous good time".
According to wikipedia Entertainment Weekly flagged the game as "racist, misogynistic, crude, cynical, humorless and stupid" and labelled it the worst game of 2008, despite previously giving the game a B and calling it "a larcenous good time".
So if Kirby's Epic Yarn is EW's worst game of the year. Then this must mean the best game of the year is fucking amazing!
Here's the thing:
If I had personally done Destructoid's official "worst games of 2010" and billed them as that, many of you would be up in arms and angry that I was speaking for an entire editorial team. Similarly, if Chad has personally done the "best games" on his own, with no input from staff, everybody would be pissed (not least the other editors).
Not only did Jeff Jensen undermine a colleague by officially (not personally, but officially) discrediting a review, but one man judging his outlet's worst games of the year just strikes me as silly. In fact, we don't know if Jeff Jensen was just the one who provided a quote on a game, while the game itself was judged by the whole staff to be the worst game of the year. Any serious outlet would do that.
The difference between this and reviews is that while reviews are personal to one guy, if you're doing a magazine's official worst/best game of the year, it should represent the entire staff. Otherwise it ought to be billed as a re-review or "Jeff Jensens's worst game of 2010." If you get one guy to do it, you just run the risk of undermining your reviewers and making your publication look confused.
This is why Super Mario Galaxy 2 is GOTY and also got a high review score from us. Because the entire staff was involved.
Bear in mind I don't condone people being angry or upset at EW over this. When I first heard about it I burst out laughing, and that's the reaction I'd encourage.
If I had personally done Destructoid's official "worst games of 2010" and billed them as that, many of you would be up in arms and angry that I was speaking for an entire editorial team. Similarly, if Chad has personally done the "best games" on his own, with no input from staff, everybody would be pissed (not least the other editors).
Not only did Jeff Jensen undermine a colleague by officially (not personally, but officially) discrediting a review, but one man judging his outlet's worst games of the year just strikes me as silly. In fact, we don't know if Jeff Jensen was just the one who provided a quote on a game, while the game itself was judged by the whole staff to be the worst game of the year. Any serious outlet would do that.
The difference between this and reviews is that while reviews are personal to one guy, if you're doing a magazine's official worst/best game of the year, it should represent the entire staff. Otherwise it ought to be billed as a re-review or "Jeff Jensens's worst game of 2010." If you get one guy to do it, you just run the risk of undermining your reviewers and making your publication look confused.
This is why Super Mario Galaxy 2 is GOTY and also got a high review score from us. Because the entire staff was involved.
Bear in mind I don't condone people being angry or upset at EW over this. When I first heard about it I burst out laughing, and that's the reaction I'd encourage.
follow
