surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
Jim, you're right. I did assume some things about you, and that has damaged my criticism. This is what one gets for rushing to post, I think.
I guess the main point that I wanted to express was the telegraphing of personal bias in news reporting, which, while fine in comments and blogs etc, come across as unprofessional in main news stories. Maybe it's also the way in which these comments are written out, where the bias is literally put as a preceding descriptor.
As for my tone, I apologize.
Please do check out the SA fake reviews of games, as they are strikingly similar to this production (which was my motivation for posting initially), and look to achieve the same goals. Perhaps by reading them, you can find where they succeeded or failed, and use that info to craft your next production.
I guess the main point that I wanted to express was the telegraphing of personal bias in news reporting, which, while fine in comments and blogs etc, come across as unprofessional in main news stories. Maybe it's also the way in which these comments are written out, where the bias is literally put as a preceding descriptor.
As for my tone, I apologize.
Please do check out the SA fake reviews of games, as they are strikingly similar to this production (which was my motivation for posting initially), and look to achieve the same goals. Perhaps by reading them, you can find where they succeeded or failed, and use that info to craft your next production.
I always thought Jim was a butler because of his monocle and now i know this is a lie and I will never like jim again because his accent is from a freshman i hate jim and his butler facade
@Blodia
Jim sounds a lot more like Garth Marenghi than anything else, who is actually British. And...what would be wrong with having an influence?
Jim sounds a lot more like Garth Marenghi than anything else, who is actually British. And...what would be wrong with having an influence?
Z0MG YOU'RE 5O WRONG!!1! THAT WAS GEARZ OF WARZ!1!!1D0NT YOU KNOW N3THING ABOUT VIDEOG4MZ???/?
Haha I love these, Jim. Keep up the good work.
Haha I love these, Jim. Keep up the good work.
@Blodia
Oops - fixing my last statement for clarification: where do you think SA/Lowtax/Fragmaster got their comedy style from?
I even think Jim is older than everyone but Lowtax, and it's possible he watched some of the UK programs that Lowtax and Co. were influenced by.
Oops - fixing my last statement for clarification: where do you think SA/Lowtax/Fragmaster got their comedy style from?
I even think Jim is older than everyone but Lowtax, and it's possible he watched some of the UK programs that Lowtax and Co. were influenced by.
Alex Vanessa is a good character but she never has sex with Master System and just talks a lot but Master System can't talk because he is an robot I think so she isn't very interesting. I liked Corona better.
Eh, not as good as Bioshock and Street Fighter, but better than some. This one scores around the middle of the list for me.
@Blodia: I love your name.
Also, I'm glad that you are one of the few people on the internet that can present their criticisms in a polite, non-hysterical manner.
However, I do want to point out that, in my opinion, personal bias is important in reporting. I'd rather see the (sometimes over-the-top)opinion of the author than see more people trying to write with a pretense of objectivity. I do understand the importance of a fair balanced article, but I do believe there has to be a bit of personal bias in an article to make it both realistic and interesting.
Also, I'm glad that you are one of the few people on the internet that can present their criticisms in a polite, non-hysterical manner.
However, I do want to point out that, in my opinion, personal bias is important in reporting. I'd rather see the (sometimes over-the-top)opinion of the author than see more people trying to write with a pretense of objectivity. I do understand the importance of a fair balanced article, but I do believe there has to be a bit of personal bias in an article to make it both realistic and interesting.
@Blodia
Why exactly are you saying he is biased on something that is obviously parody? I don't get it.
Why exactly are you saying he is biased on something that is obviously parody? I don't get it.
"I guess the main point that I wanted to express was the telegraphing of personal bias in news reporting, which, while fine in comments and blogs etc, come across as unprofessional in main news stories. Maybe it's also the way in which these comments are written out, where the bias is literally put as a preceding descriptor."
These criticisms here are off-topic, really, but I'll gladly address them.
The thing is, Destructoid is different from your average news site. We're not really a "news" site, per se. We're known for our personality and humor and willingness to editorialize. We know that you can get your videogame news from dozens of other Web sites, so we want to add that extra little bit of flavor.
Sure, you can just read news from anywhere, but people come to Dtoid to *discuss* the news, not just read it. It's my job, as a blogger for this site, to kickstart that discussion.
These criticisms here are off-topic, really, but I'll gladly address them.
The thing is, Destructoid is different from your average news site. We're not really a "news" site, per se. We're known for our personality and humor and willingness to editorialize. We know that you can get your videogame news from dozens of other Web sites, so we want to add that extra little bit of flavor.
Sure, you can just read news from anywhere, but people come to Dtoid to *discuss* the news, not just read it. It's my job, as a blogger for this site, to kickstart that discussion.
Outstanding as usual, Jim. These have become my favorite contributions.
I just wish your accent wasn't so obvious and made up.
I just wish your accent wasn't so obvious and made up.
@Jim
I agree with your disavowals of Blodia's criticisms on the basis that Destructoid IS a news site in which articles are typically 40% news and 60% editorialization and attitudinal "flavor," as it were, so, no, it isn't strictly a news site, but for you to state that "you can read news from anywhere, but people come to Dtoid to *discuss* the news, not just read it," clashes with the fact that this IS a news site primarily because you do report the news throughout the day, consistently, and that you use the news as a basis for the resulting "discussions"; you can't fault Blodia, in my opinion, for misconstruing the intent of the site because the ratio of editorials versus news which appear on the site, day by day, is grossly uneven, heavily weighing in news's favor; further, you claim Destructoid isn't a news site by stating that it is a new site packing a little extra, and therefore it, fundamentally, is a news site. Your nebulous explanation likely doesn't assuage that assumption of his.
I must agree with Blodia forthrightly, though, in his suggestion that these "editorial(?)" videos of yours could benefit from additional layers of commentary, and that I, along with him, seem to be in the disturbing minority by possessing such a belief. My criticisms mostly originate from an audience perspective, and the purpose of these videos seem to be to inflame specific, hotly-partisan fanboys by boiling down a beloved franchise or game to its commonly-understood stereotypes; thusly, my criticism is, if all the aspects of the franchise or game that you lambaste (in this case, the Gears of War franchise's lack of color, the egregious violence, and the rampant racist and homophobic epithets espoused and unrelentingly invoked by the ubiquitously 12-year-old, soprano-voiced online community) are pre-accepted by everyone before they've even watched your videos then what's the point? What discussion do you hope to "kickstart" because all permutations of any possible discussion have already been relegated to history? What commentary or insights, apart from what's already been vocalized and chronicled for the past 2+, in the case of the Gears of War franchise, do you offer? What's new or compelling or original or unique here? I believe this component of Blodia's basic argument to be the most prescient, and it is what I humbly emphasize.
The flummoxing of elements of Halo and Gears of War, along with the Lionel Richie bookends, and your fictitious authorial anecdotes are comedic red herrings which singularly entertain rather than inflame or incite - are filler, essentially, in this episode - yet seem to be what the audience responds to with mob glee and praise (for you) rather than with their opinions concerning lamentable industry trends or scrutinizations of fanboyism, and, were I you, as the creator of this work, I might view that as a problem. If you mean to entertain solely then all's well and all's good and I apologize, Jim, for having stolen the time it's taken you to have read this, but I perhaps erroneously assume that you mean to do more.
Thanks for your time.
I agree with your disavowals of Blodia's criticisms on the basis that Destructoid IS a news site in which articles are typically 40% news and 60% editorialization and attitudinal "flavor," as it were, so, no, it isn't strictly a news site, but for you to state that "you can read news from anywhere, but people come to Dtoid to *discuss* the news, not just read it," clashes with the fact that this IS a news site primarily because you do report the news throughout the day, consistently, and that you use the news as a basis for the resulting "discussions"; you can't fault Blodia, in my opinion, for misconstruing the intent of the site because the ratio of editorials versus news which appear on the site, day by day, is grossly uneven, heavily weighing in news's favor; further, you claim Destructoid isn't a news site by stating that it is a new site packing a little extra, and therefore it, fundamentally, is a news site. Your nebulous explanation likely doesn't assuage that assumption of his.
I must agree with Blodia forthrightly, though, in his suggestion that these "editorial(?)" videos of yours could benefit from additional layers of commentary, and that I, along with him, seem to be in the disturbing minority by possessing such a belief. My criticisms mostly originate from an audience perspective, and the purpose of these videos seem to be to inflame specific, hotly-partisan fanboys by boiling down a beloved franchise or game to its commonly-understood stereotypes; thusly, my criticism is, if all the aspects of the franchise or game that you lambaste (in this case, the Gears of War franchise's lack of color, the egregious violence, and the rampant racist and homophobic epithets espoused and unrelentingly invoked by the ubiquitously 12-year-old, soprano-voiced online community) are pre-accepted by everyone before they've even watched your videos then what's the point? What discussion do you hope to "kickstart" because all permutations of any possible discussion have already been relegated to history? What commentary or insights, apart from what's already been vocalized and chronicled for the past 2+, in the case of the Gears of War franchise, do you offer? What's new or compelling or original or unique here? I believe this component of Blodia's basic argument to be the most prescient, and it is what I humbly emphasize.
The flummoxing of elements of Halo and Gears of War, along with the Lionel Richie bookends, and your fictitious authorial anecdotes are comedic red herrings which singularly entertain rather than inflame or incite - are filler, essentially, in this episode - yet seem to be what the audience responds to with mob glee and praise (for you) rather than with their opinions concerning lamentable industry trends or scrutinizations of fanboyism, and, were I you, as the creator of this work, I might view that as a problem. If you mean to entertain solely then all's well and all's good and I apologize, Jim, for having stolen the time it's taken you to have read this, but I perhaps erroneously assume that you mean to do more.
Thanks for your time.
Jim, have you ever considered taking down GTTV and starting your own show? I guess if you can't/don't finish that book I had you write earlier, you can always have GTTV removed off television in replace of these awesome review segments. GTTV just isn't what it used to be anyways.
And I meant to write "2+ years" above in the sentence to which it pertains, to castigate myself before anyone else uses that error to renounce the glut of my words on the basis of faulty sentence construction/my faulty credibility.
I never realized how much Halo looks like this other game I saw a video of once until the slow-mo at the end. Weird...
"I must agree with Blodia forthrightly, though, in his suggestion that these "editorial(?)" videos of yours could benefit from additional layers of commentary, and that I, along with him, seem to be in the disturbing minority by possessing such a belief. My criticisms mostly originate from an audience perspective, and the purpose of these videos seem to be to inflame specific, hotly-partisan fanboys by boiling down a beloved franchise or game to its commonly-understood stereotypes; thusly, my criticism is, if all the aspects of the franchise or game that you lambaste (in this case, the Gears of War franchise's lack of color, the egregious violence, and the rampant racist and homophobic epithets espoused and unrelentingly invoked by the ubiquitously 12-year-old, soprano-voiced online community) are pre-accepted by everyone before they've even watched your videos then what's the point? What discussion do you hope to "kickstart" because all permutations of any possible discussion have already been relegated to history? What commentary or insights, apart from what's already been vocalized and chronicled for the past 2+, in the case of the Gears of War franchise, do you offer? What's new or compelling or original or unique here? I believe this component of Blodia's basic argument to be the most prescient, and it is what I humbly emphasize."
Wow ... you read a lot into the video. A lot that isn't there. Seems you completely missed the point of the whole series, really.
These videos are, first and foremost, just for laughs. I do them for fun and I only do them to make people laugh. There's no ulterior motive. I'm not trying to troll of inflame, it's just a spoof series of videos that makes fun of the kind of bad video reviews you see all over Youtube and blogs. That's really all they are.
You've read far too much into them.
Wow ... you read a lot into the video. A lot that isn't there. Seems you completely missed the point of the whole series, really.
These videos are, first and foremost, just for laughs. I do them for fun and I only do them to make people laugh. There's no ulterior motive. I'm not trying to troll of inflame, it's just a spoof series of videos that makes fun of the kind of bad video reviews you see all over Youtube and blogs. That's really all they are.
You've read far too much into them.
@winkbaufield
Or maybe, y'know, Jim just likes to make amusing parody videos.
Jesus tittyfucking Christ, some of you guys could make Disneyland as fun as a Holocaust museum.
Or maybe, y'know, Jim just likes to make amusing parody videos.
Jesus tittyfucking Christ, some of you guys could make Disneyland as fun as a Holocaust museum.
@thecleaningguy
I agree with you to a large degree. I don't turn to one news/review site over another in hopes that I read only the same, regurgitated, news feed passed down from AP or some grossly misspelled firsthand live-blogging. I genuinely look for a fresh perspective in the relatively stagnant world of video game reporting (multiple stories with suspiciously similar wording about mundane things like controller unboxings or whatnot). The frustration I sometimes have is that, often, the "attitude" of a site or of specific blogging personalities can overshadow the content. I don't want just a boring old news site, but I also don't care for articles and productions whose sole purpose is to polarize the community under the auspices of "jump-starting conversation".
@Jim
My criticism was not "off topic", as I feel that my objections to a video-blog retread of well-worn territory naturally led me to a segue about your blogging style as a whole. As I have never posted here before, it was a culmination of various thoughts that got me to finally sign up and post.
Again, forgive me for the slight against your accent: I have unfortunately seen many attempts to follow in the No Punctuation style with few (if any) successes, and I must admit that I am a bit jaded when hearing accents in game-blog videos. The community here has, rightly, made light of this mistake, and I hope no ill-will has come of it.
To elaborate on a point I expressed earlier: I feel that this method of bias-as-descriptor style of blogging does the community a disservice, especially on subjects that involve and are important to all of us. For example, when talking about the infamous Jack Thompson, you have said this:
"If only Jack Thompson used his manipulation and straw manning to make sensible points like that, I think we'd have an old kook who would deserve a lot more respect"
Now, I agree with almost every point you make in your coverage of Jack Thompson and his shenanigans, however, I feel that by calling him names like "old kook" and whatnot damages the professional image of this site. While we may not be here strictly for news (thank goodness), you are a professionally-run site, who is attempting to promote your legitimacy by resorting to transparent attacks on people to express your dissatisfaction. This is a relatively common occurrence at Dtoid.
To me, there is a difference between "style" and "sassiness", the latter being the realm of the unskilled, dime-a-dozen "blogger", and the former being the right of any accomplished writer. My main fear is that commentary that uses name-calling and heavy-handed spin will quickly be dismissed by the rest of the news and blogging community at large, and that the subjects of these attacks will be able to easily deflect these articles by calling them "childish". This negates any positive points you have made to the issue.
I raise these issues, as you say you do, to kick-start the discussion about the line between legitimacy in reporting and blogging and the "I've got the microphone" syndrome of just saying the first thing that comes to mind. As I placed a poor foot forward in my initial post, I can heartily see that this is a difficult thing to track, but, to me, it is worth remembering and contemplating.
I agree with you to a large degree. I don't turn to one news/review site over another in hopes that I read only the same, regurgitated, news feed passed down from AP or some grossly misspelled firsthand live-blogging. I genuinely look for a fresh perspective in the relatively stagnant world of video game reporting (multiple stories with suspiciously similar wording about mundane things like controller unboxings or whatnot). The frustration I sometimes have is that, often, the "attitude" of a site or of specific blogging personalities can overshadow the content. I don't want just a boring old news site, but I also don't care for articles and productions whose sole purpose is to polarize the community under the auspices of "jump-starting conversation".
@Jim
My criticism was not "off topic", as I feel that my objections to a video-blog retread of well-worn territory naturally led me to a segue about your blogging style as a whole. As I have never posted here before, it was a culmination of various thoughts that got me to finally sign up and post.
Again, forgive me for the slight against your accent: I have unfortunately seen many attempts to follow in the No Punctuation style with few (if any) successes, and I must admit that I am a bit jaded when hearing accents in game-blog videos. The community here has, rightly, made light of this mistake, and I hope no ill-will has come of it.
To elaborate on a point I expressed earlier: I feel that this method of bias-as-descriptor style of blogging does the community a disservice, especially on subjects that involve and are important to all of us. For example, when talking about the infamous Jack Thompson, you have said this:
"If only Jack Thompson used his manipulation and straw manning to make sensible points like that, I think we'd have an old kook who would deserve a lot more respect"
Now, I agree with almost every point you make in your coverage of Jack Thompson and his shenanigans, however, I feel that by calling him names like "old kook" and whatnot damages the professional image of this site. While we may not be here strictly for news (thank goodness), you are a professionally-run site, who is attempting to promote your legitimacy by resorting to transparent attacks on people to express your dissatisfaction. This is a relatively common occurrence at Dtoid.
To me, there is a difference between "style" and "sassiness", the latter being the realm of the unskilled, dime-a-dozen "blogger", and the former being the right of any accomplished writer. My main fear is that commentary that uses name-calling and heavy-handed spin will quickly be dismissed by the rest of the news and blogging community at large, and that the subjects of these attacks will be able to easily deflect these articles by calling them "childish". This negates any positive points you have made to the issue.
I raise these issues, as you say you do, to kick-start the discussion about the line between legitimacy in reporting and blogging and the "I've got the microphone" syndrome of just saying the first thing that comes to mind. As I placed a poor foot forward in my initial post, I can heartily see that this is a difficult thing to track, but, to me, it is worth remembering and contemplating.
Oh Jim, trying so hard to be Yahtzee and failing miserably.
Look Jim, Yahtzee is a master of his craft, you are just a shitty writer with an editing program, your show is horrible and anyone who says its better than escapist is a moron and has no taste.
Seriously, this is pathetic, even for you.
Look Jim, Yahtzee is a master of his craft, you are just a shitty writer with an editing program, your show is horrible and anyone who says its better than escapist is a moron and has no taste.
Seriously, this is pathetic, even for you.
I really don't know what's worse: the trolls who can't spell worth a shit or these guys trying to act intelligent by typing out large words in massive comments to read into the symbolism of a show where you talked about your uncle jizzing on you.
Stop being so serious, dudes. Seriously. This is Destructoid. We do what we want to do. And that's what makes us different.
Stop being so serious, dudes. Seriously. This is Destructoid. We do what we want to do. And that's what makes us different.
This was too awesome, had to replay it because of it's awesomeness, and I'm glad I did, heard some other funny stuff the second time.
Jim, Halo-elujah is the newest word in my vocabulary!
Jim, Halo-elujah is the newest word in my vocabulary!
there is nothing more annoying than multi-paragraph comment on an article. its a funny 3 minute video, thats it.
@Nanbu
You're totally right. The Escapist is much better than Jim.
So I trust you'll simper off and never come back, yeah? Great.
You're totally right. The Escapist is much better than Jim.
So I trust you'll simper off and never come back, yeah? Great.
Blodia: Your concern is noted and appreciated. However, this "unprofessional" style of mine is what has given me a full-time job and allowed me to provide for my family, so I'm sure you can understand why I would rather keep doing things the way I do them. I understand that some people don't like it but, evidently, enough people do because I still have this job and have never been asked by my superiors to change.
Obviously, you have a choice of editor to read. Some people read and watch my content just to be upset by it and post angry little comments, as this thread will demonstrate quite aptly. However, those with a shred of emotional development can simply choose not to read my work. That's up to you, for I currently have no reason nor desire to alter my style.
Obviously, you have a choice of editor to read. Some people read and watch my content just to be upset by it and post angry little comments, as this thread will demonstrate quite aptly. However, those with a shred of emotional development can simply choose not to read my work. That's up to you, for I currently have no reason nor desire to alter my style.
That church with the crawl space. Why does this make me laugh? How do you do this thing which you do to me? But has this thread seriously turned into the Charlie Rose show?
@Nanbu, when you post here and comment that Yahtzee does it better you are unintentionally part of the punchline actually. Just to let you know really.
@Nanbu, when you post here and comment that Yahtzee does it better you are unintentionally part of the punchline actually. Just to let you know really.
Jim, can I convert to British too? Do I need to eat more meat and swear off dentistry? TELL ME WHAT I MUST DO?!
@Jim
Conversely, I didn't read a lot into your video, I only reacted to what isn't there. If your singular and concentrated intent is to make people laugh with these, and they're ironic mimics of "worse" YouTube videos, I question, again, what purpose they serve if troves of similar but sincere atrocities languish tormentedly but a few mouse-clicks away? Why not instead compile the genuine specimens in all their intensely fetid spectacle if laughter is your end?; your videos, after all, are "spoof" clones, and duplications, even varied duplications, of an original source, by some scientific law, I'm certain, prove never to be as potent as their antecedent. You clearly are fascinated with or repulsed by the source YouTube videos to a degree strong enough to, "in [your] spare time," craft caricatures of your inspiration, and people watch them because they're there on the frontpage, I guess, but if they aren't newsworthy, aren't meant to editorialize (as you claim), and aren't as profound(ly agonizing) as their video forefathers, then why are they there? As an editor of an influential news-based videogame site, I suspect that you have the responsibility, with every one of your posts, to inform, explore, critique, or provoke, or some sustainable mixture of all four purposes, but That Videogame Show What I've Done, in accordance with your one aim of "[making] people laugh," is intended as pure diversion. I speak only for myself as a reader of this site, and a discerning peruser of the internet in general, but I'm disappointed when, after reading a post here, I have learned nothing, my horizons as a gamer have not been expanded, an argument has not been proffered to me which I am welcomed to consider, or my opinions and values have not been challenged in such a way that thought is the yielded product. If I want only to laugh, I visit a site specializing in humor, not a videogame blog portly with attitude. That Videogame Show What I've Done could be more than it is if you were to extend to it the farcical effort with which you approach the majority of your other routine weekend contributions, such as you post condemning the Wii from a month or two ago - it was and confrontational to the Wii apologist, and condemned them for following so blindly a trend. In the case of your video column, the trend seems to be the direct lauding of you, and the product, rather than being, as I mentioned previously, any meaningful discussion about the industry, are instead incandescent statements of your general brilliance. Whether that's appropriate fare for this venue I suppose is up to your fellow editors and the members of the community, but I'd prefer that actual relevance superseded diversion and empty, momentary amusement. To reply to your statement that "[I] read far too much into [your videos]," it's less that I read too much into them and more that I see through them.
@Bioautographical
Parody is an authorial technique which is deliberately used to highlight the inadequacies of some ideology or methodology or whatever various -ology so that its audience will be enlightened via irony, and betterment of some kind will ensue. Jim says that he only wants to make people laugh. That's comedy, not parody. Further, in one comment you offhandedly manage two anti-Semitic references, one visual and one textual; if you expect anyone to take you seriously, ever, I recommend you forsake flippancy for accountability.
@Blodia
You seem to be the only like-minded individual commenting here. I agree that attitude (exemplified by Destructoid's sardonic JOURNALISM!! mantra) often derides sensibility and credibility. The longer members of the videogame press feel compelled to obfuscate reasoned opinion with wryness and write about the subject of videogames with half-defensive irreverence, the longer it will take for the industry at large to command respect and free itself from the yoke of its diversionary status.
Conversely, I didn't read a lot into your video, I only reacted to what isn't there. If your singular and concentrated intent is to make people laugh with these, and they're ironic mimics of "worse" YouTube videos, I question, again, what purpose they serve if troves of similar but sincere atrocities languish tormentedly but a few mouse-clicks away? Why not instead compile the genuine specimens in all their intensely fetid spectacle if laughter is your end?; your videos, after all, are "spoof" clones, and duplications, even varied duplications, of an original source, by some scientific law, I'm certain, prove never to be as potent as their antecedent. You clearly are fascinated with or repulsed by the source YouTube videos to a degree strong enough to, "in [your] spare time," craft caricatures of your inspiration, and people watch them because they're there on the frontpage, I guess, but if they aren't newsworthy, aren't meant to editorialize (as you claim), and aren't as profound(ly agonizing) as their video forefathers, then why are they there? As an editor of an influential news-based videogame site, I suspect that you have the responsibility, with every one of your posts, to inform, explore, critique, or provoke, or some sustainable mixture of all four purposes, but That Videogame Show What I've Done, in accordance with your one aim of "[making] people laugh," is intended as pure diversion. I speak only for myself as a reader of this site, and a discerning peruser of the internet in general, but I'm disappointed when, after reading a post here, I have learned nothing, my horizons as a gamer have not been expanded, an argument has not been proffered to me which I am welcomed to consider, or my opinions and values have not been challenged in such a way that thought is the yielded product. If I want only to laugh, I visit a site specializing in humor, not a videogame blog portly with attitude. That Videogame Show What I've Done could be more than it is if you were to extend to it the farcical effort with which you approach the majority of your other routine weekend contributions, such as you post condemning the Wii from a month or two ago - it was and confrontational to the Wii apologist, and condemned them for following so blindly a trend. In the case of your video column, the trend seems to be the direct lauding of you, and the product, rather than being, as I mentioned previously, any meaningful discussion about the industry, are instead incandescent statements of your general brilliance. Whether that's appropriate fare for this venue I suppose is up to your fellow editors and the members of the community, but I'd prefer that actual relevance superseded diversion and empty, momentary amusement. To reply to your statement that "[I] read far too much into [your videos]," it's less that I read too much into them and more that I see through them.
@Bioautographical
Parody is an authorial technique which is deliberately used to highlight the inadequacies of some ideology or methodology or whatever various -ology so that its audience will be enlightened via irony, and betterment of some kind will ensue. Jim says that he only wants to make people laugh. That's comedy, not parody. Further, in one comment you offhandedly manage two anti-Semitic references, one visual and one textual; if you expect anyone to take you seriously, ever, I recommend you forsake flippancy for accountability.
@Blodia
You seem to be the only like-minded individual commenting here. I agree that attitude (exemplified by Destructoid's sardonic JOURNALISM!! mantra) often derides sensibility and credibility. The longer members of the videogame press feel compelled to obfuscate reasoned opinion with wryness and write about the subject of videogames with half-defensive irreverence, the longer it will take for the industry at large to command respect and free itself from the yoke of its diversionary status.
"Why are they there?"
Because enough people want them there. Simple as that.
As soon as enough people don't want them there, they go. Also, as simple as that.
Because enough people want them there. Simple as that.
As soon as enough people don't want them there, they go. Also, as simple as that.
Also, you appear to be disappointed because you have imposed your own idea of what Destructoid is onto Destructoid. Frankly, if you feel let down by the content because it doesn't fulfill your personal arbitrary checkbox, then that's your own fault.
@winkbaufield
I do bow to you as the master of assumption. I'd like to know where you got the idea that I have any "need" or desire for anyone to "take me seriously". You seem to also ascribe that ideal to Jim. Do you regularly construct entire imaginary personae in the presence of others for the sake of criticizing their imputed flaws? Is it a hobby for you?
He's already said he's here to make people laugh. He's done a fine job of it, even IF there are a few corpses in the audience. Corpses that, hooray for them, know lots of ostentatious words and can quote Webster's perfectly with all the same charm and vivacity found therein.
Your concerns have been duly noted yet judged more or less worthless, especially since you insist on delivering them in the most condescending, pompous way possible. You're boring. Go away.
I do bow to you as the master of assumption. I'd like to know where you got the idea that I have any "need" or desire for anyone to "take me seriously". You seem to also ascribe that ideal to Jim. Do you regularly construct entire imaginary personae in the presence of others for the sake of criticizing their imputed flaws? Is it a hobby for you?
He's already said he's here to make people laugh. He's done a fine job of it, even IF there are a few corpses in the audience. Corpses that, hooray for them, know lots of ostentatious words and can quote Webster's perfectly with all the same charm and vivacity found therein.
Your concerns have been duly noted yet judged more or less worthless, especially since you insist on delivering them in the most condescending, pompous way possible. You're boring. Go away.
Did a Hoborg clone clan assault the comments sections? What's with these long ass comments on a satirical video?
Actually, I base my opinions of what Destructoid is based on what most of the posts strive to accomplish, and also based on your "This is the Destructoid ethos" response to Blodia earlier today. Evidence is only arbitrary in the bureaucracies of the courtroom and the internet, I suppose.
To paraphrase one of the other commentators: "Destructoid does what it wants to do!" That's cool and all, if not hilariously vague; it just seems to me that Destructoid was originated by Niero with purpose, and that all facets of the website should reflect purpose, and That Videogame Show What I've Done, by your own admission, is amusement without purpose. I apologize, though, for that being my fault.
To paraphrase one of the other commentators: "Destructoid does what it wants to do!" That's cool and all, if not hilariously vague; it just seems to me that Destructoid was originated by Niero with purpose, and that all facets of the website should reflect purpose, and That Videogame Show What I've Done, by your own admission, is amusement without purpose. I apologize, though, for that being my fault.
Ah, wait, here we go, this actually makes more sense: ". . . the longer it will take for the industry at large to command respect and free itself from the yoke of its diversionary status."
If that's YOUR aim - whoever you are and whatever your purpose - good for you. I personally sneer at people who are SO desperate for video games to be "taken seriously" that they'll forsake any measure of entertainment in order to somehow hoist them up to the level of haute film or literature. Truth is, I regard snobbish, self-important film and book critics the same way I do said critics of video games - with contempt. If you must learn something from every single endeavor you pursue, then godspeed, but leave the rest of us alone. Video games are fun; talking about them is fun, writing about them is fun, and playing them is fun. Sometimes they provide some deeper insight into the human condition via a well-crafted story and richly-developed characters. Sometimes they're just mindless diversion.
You get out of them what you want, and we'll get out of them what WE want. Alright with you, champ? Super.
If that's YOUR aim - whoever you are and whatever your purpose - good for you. I personally sneer at people who are SO desperate for video games to be "taken seriously" that they'll forsake any measure of entertainment in order to somehow hoist them up to the level of haute film or literature. Truth is, I regard snobbish, self-important film and book critics the same way I do said critics of video games - with contempt. If you must learn something from every single endeavor you pursue, then godspeed, but leave the rest of us alone. Video games are fun; talking about them is fun, writing about them is fun, and playing them is fun. Sometimes they provide some deeper insight into the human condition via a well-crafted story and richly-developed characters. Sometimes they're just mindless diversion.
You get out of them what you want, and we'll get out of them what WE want. Alright with you, champ? Super.
I'm detecting some inflated English in this thread in an attempt to sound edumacated.
Anyways. My humble net-opinion says the folks "reading too far into" this video, and others of the same nature, need to chill out. Why on earth attempt to dissect every detail of something like this. Seriously, if you just sat there and began fuming at this I seriously would have to call you either A) a very boring individual with little of humor or B) a bitter aggressive with little sense of humor.
Granted we're all entitled to an opinion, you should try to lighten up before you get old. :/
Anyways. My humble net-opinion says the folks "reading too far into" this video, and others of the same nature, need to chill out. Why on earth attempt to dissect every detail of something like this. Seriously, if you just sat there and began fuming at this I seriously would have to call you either A) a very boring individual with little of humor or B) a bitter aggressive with little sense of humor.
Granted we're all entitled to an opinion, you should try to lighten up before you get old. :/
Bioautographical, you're an astounding hypocrite in regard to condescension, but that's another of your discrediting attributes amongst which I'm certain there are infinite. Just know that my disregard for you is inferred from evidence (and not assumed from ether). If I bore you then please cease writing about me (further hypocrisy) and continue leading your meaningless life fraught with just-fun books, music, literature, web videos, and games. If you're a champion for your side of this argument, whatever it is now, then I weep with gladness in standing alone.
Why wouldn't any lover of videogames want them, and the industry, to be taken seriously? What's the danger in that? Why cringe at the prospect of being respected for engaging in the hobby of your adulation? That mentality is one I don't understand. Bioautographical, care to explain?
Why wouldn't any lover of videogames want them, and the industry, to be taken seriously? What's the danger in that? Why cringe at the prospect of being respected for engaging in the hobby of your adulation? That mentality is one I don't understand. Bioautographical, care to explain?
Ever occur to you that Niero's purpose was to make something different than the other gaming blogs that blends humor and serious discussion into one package?
Y'know, a site for gamers by gamers?
Y'know, a site for gamers by gamers?
Master System versus the Cabinets. I don't know how you're not working on the next big thing in fanfiction--I'm already good as sold.
CANT UNDERSTAND A WORD OF THAT AUSTRALIAN JIM
@Bioautographical - Thank you for attempting to bring these people down to earth, these people probably jacking off because they can talk posh and try to outsmart people on the internet, when in reality, all it's about is having a bloody laugh.
also, winkbaufield: tl;dr.
@Bioautographical - Thank you for attempting to bring these people down to earth, these people probably jacking off because they can talk posh and try to outsmart people on the internet, when in reality, all it's about is having a bloody laugh.
also, winkbaufield: tl;dr.
follow
