Theory

[icycalm]

He is supposed to be an expert in "reviewing" in general. This is a special kind of expertise, which allows you to review anything -- from refrigerators to Puccini operas -- without actually having any clue as to what it is you are talking about.

He has stated in his blog that the most important thing for a reviewer is to be a good writer. Game knowledge, he says, is very easy to acquire AFTER you have got a job as a reviewer. Stuart Campbell has said pretty much the same thing. I'll find the links and use them in an upcoming article.

[icycalm]

http://hg101.proboards92.com/index.cgi? ... hread=4549

And I haven't even written the article yet.

[icycalm]

Also, yes:

To be mediocre implies not being up to snuff, as if we have some larger goal we're not achieving -- settling for less.

http://hg101.proboards92.com/index.cgi? ... ge=1#88894

[Recap]

I believe it's a snarky response against a rival site, Insomniac.

(I would suggest reading some of his site for hilarity, but you'd be giving his site hits, so I dunno.) He has something against me and the site for some reason.

It's mostly just the few forum posters that seem to have a distaste for it/me.

I've seen people argue against his pieces, and his defenses usually just about to name-calling. He's an excellent writer but also an extraordinary blowhard, and I really hope people can tell the difference.

he's been banned from practically every forum I've visited, and then he writes blog posts about how no one appreciates him. It's very much a site built more around a personality than actual content, and the personality is actively an extraordinarily unlikable human being.

The actual lol is how the guy took it as something personal instead of holding his breath for a moment and trying to figure out why his site inspires so many laughs for some people. Kids these days...

[icycalm]

One of the main reasons (apart from plain stupidity) holding him back from reevaluating his site, is that if he realized how mediocre it is, and if he decided to do something about it, he would be forced to pretty much delete it and start from scratch. And with all the effort he and others have put into it over the last 4-5 years, this is something he doesn't even want to BEGIN to contemplate. Even if someone he really respects came forward and told him that his site pretty much defines mediocrity, and that he would be better off reevaluating his priorities and starting from scratch, Kurt would probably just come up with more lame excuses to avoid facing the issue.

That's why I admire what Josh did with SegaFans. He simply wiped the site, started over with new priorities and higher standards, and now his site is awesome. But I guess he had simply "inherited" the older site, so he must not have invested that much effort in the earlier version. He did not lose much of his own work, so the move must have been easier to make.

So yeah. Sometimes you just have to have the guts to cut your losses, and move on. Level up, in a manner of speaking. But some people are content with being Level 1 grunts all their lives long.

All of which reminds me that some of the older reviews on this site suck, and I need to muster the courage to delete them.

[Recap]

Even if someone he really respects came forward and told him that his site pretty much defines mediocrity, and that he would be better off reevaluating his priorities and starting from scratch, Kurt would probably just come up with more lame excuses to avoid facing the issue.

Oh, I actually believe that the guy does really respect you. All those paragraphs of passionate insulting attempts must mean something.

That's why I admire what Josh did with SegaFans. He simply wiped the site, started over with new priorities and higher standards, and now his site is awesome.

'Cept for a dumb site name/premise?

He will be changing that sooner or later, I'm sure, but it's a shame he hasn't realize it yet.

So yeah. Sometimes you just have to have the guts to cut your losses, and move on. Level up, in a manner of speaking. But some people are content with being Level 1 grunts all their lives long.

Quantity over quality, you know. He is level 30 at external linkage, which most likely is his goal much like it is of Racketboy. Why bother.

[JoshF]

Where's this grand debunking of your arcade culture article they're talking about? All I remember from shmumps was a lot of people calling you a weaboo for saying Japan had better players because that's where the scene is (Brazilboo if you were talking about soccer). Maybe you should have visited an American arcade (Chuck E. Cheese) and described watching kids credit feed on a Hydro Thunder cab, or described watching other kids credit-feed on the other Hydro Thunder cab.

As for racketboy, does combining wikipedia copy & paste with gamefaqs review consensus count as a new website?

[icycalm]

There hasn't been any debunking, of course. Even the single lame objection to my article that Kurt made in that thread (that arcade games are made to be "impressive", not good) was perfectly countered by one of his own forum members. The thread he is referring to is this one:

http://forums.selectbutton.net/viewtopic.php?t=6266

In which of course nothing is debunked -- apart from the myth that there are actually intelligent people posting on Select Button. The most intelligent of them actually thought that UFO Catchers were video games or some shit.

[icycalm]

Let me clarify something here. I am not trying to convince anyone in this forum that there is such a thing as superior taste. To understand this one would have to be able to understand Schopenhauer and Sontag, and very few people can do this, let alone gamers. I was simply responding to Ollie, because I like him and because I think he would benefit from becoming acquainted with the philosophical background of the current argument. I hardly expect anyone else to take notice, let alone understand and agree with what these great thinkers have said. So the best thing for everyone would be to simply ignore what I am saying/quoting/linking and pretend that I don't exist. Spouting random uninformed banal opinions is anyway more fun than examining any matter in depth, after all. So enjoy!

http://www.rllmukforum.com/index.php?s= ... &p=5858754

I am having way too much fun in that thread for my own good. I could have finished two-three articles in the time I've spent reading and replying to the nonsense that's been going on in there.

[icycalm]

This goes without saying. Just like we embrace and learn from as many games, films, movies and philosophies as possible. That doesn't mean we value all of them equally. This is what criticism is all about. If someone values everything equally it just means that he lacks in critical ability, and sure enough there are plenty of people of this kind. In this respect, they stand even lower than the lower animals, since even monkeys make value judgements.

http://www.rllmukforum.com/index.php?s= ... &p=5859030

I think every single post I've made in that forum in the last 48 hours or so is worth quoting. You could compile my posts into a book, with a giant LOL on the cover. Escape from the Planet of the Monkey-men.

[Afterburn]

LOL. I'm glad I frequent this forum and not that one.

[icycalm]

It's not a bad forum. The Pickfords who run it are great guys, and there are several intelligent posters on there. Some of them even contribute reviews to this site. But of course a forum with 13,000 users has at least 12,000 retards in it, and since moderation is non-existent, it is impossible to hold any conversation on complex/important issues without it quickly degenerating to a monkey-man lolfest. But when the intellectual level of the discussion is very low, as in game-specific discussions, the kids do alright. Compared to NeoGAF, for example, they are a bunch of Einsteins.

[icycalm]

As for racketboy, does combining wikipedia copy & paste with gamefaqs review consensus count as a new website?

This is going in an article, by the way. That's pretty much what Kurt is doing too.

[icycalm]

insomnia.ac/commentary/on_new_games_journalism/
http://insomnia.ac/commentary/on_new_games_journalism/
I would like to use this reference for edits to the article on Video Game Journalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by UCANTSTOPTHEBUMRUSH (talk • contribs) 21:22, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Declined. This appears to be essentially a blog post by someone whose reputation does not appear to be sufficient to make a compelling case to offset other issues with this site. Please see if you can find other, more reliable sources. Guy (Help!) 14:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_ ... rnalism.2F

All the good quotes are missing from Wikipedia, for exactly the same reasons that all interesting people are missing from paradise.

Can you say "lowest common denominator"?

[BlackerOmegalon]

House of the Dead: Overkill grants players infinite continues from the start of the game. This was a brilliant design decision

http://www.siliconera.com/2009/02/16/ho ... oody-good/

Hurts my eyes.

[icycalm]

I guess. So she likes it because it generates, or is supposed to generate, interest in the games industry, which will then pay her to cover the increased interest, so that she can get food on her table and money for shoes and haircuts? -- all the while knowing that she doesn't like the game because it's crap?

More proof that we would all be better off if these so-called "Games Industry Journalists" moved into some other field. Cosmetics, perhaps. Why not become "Cosmetics Industry Journalists"? You and Poole should think about that, too.

http://www.rllmukforum.com/index.php?s= ... &p=5867726

[icycalm]

I have no idea what they are saying, but the title caught my eye:

Retro Remakes, Nu-Retro Games

"Nu-Retro"...

[c001357]

As for the ongoing debate about whether games are art, he couldn't care less. That's what critics get paid for. "As soon as we get told, 'Yes, games are high art. They're almost as high as painting and slightly less than dance,' it's over. Freedom is dead at that point. Then the argument just becomes about people's egos. And my ego doesn't need to be told I'm an artist. I hate myself already!"

At least they got this part right.

[icycalm]

What happens when kids attempt to philosophize:

http://forums.selectbutton.net/viewtopic.php?t=19177

NFG's comments are on the money. Everyone else's are lollerific -- I mean those I skimmed, because I didn't actually read all of it.

[Evo]

The dangers of reviewing

http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/02/video_game_critic_killed_over_7.php#more

[BlackerOmegalon]

The plight of the professional game reviewer. *single tear* Nobody gives that much of a shit about their reviews, only game journalists think that, it's just another one of their many assumptions (such as thinking that they can write funny satire).

[Bradford]

Low hanging fruit, I know, but just this once I couldn't resist.

Cut Scenes: One of the best parts of this game are the cut scenes.

Halo Wars Review: A Fistful of Spartans

You know, it could have been worse; he could have said one of the best parts of the game were those little animated movies that play intermittently to interrupt the game. But see actually, he loved all those scenes that were created during the production of the game that the designers chose not to include in the final version, so ... so... I guess he's not as dumb as you thought, huh?

[Worm]

Motion-based games pretty much defeat the purpose of videogames.
http://forum.insomnia.ac/viewtopic.php? ... ight=#6968

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a14s1LcCUWs
A demonstration.

[icycalm]

That is hilarious. Hopefully it will convince a few blockheads who can't grasp anything unless it is presented to them in a grossly exaggerated manner, preferably in video form by a bunch of funny blokes.

[Evo]

The 13 Basic Principles of Gameplay Design
by Matt Allmer

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3949/the_13_basic_principles_of_.php