It's up

>on his patreon

I knew there was a reason I didn't like him.

Downwell is a good little game and also a PC game

Hey I respect Wagar's opinions on a lot of stuff but that doesn't mean you have to spam the same stuff all the time.

>reviewing a game isn't reviewing a game, even though it's reviewing a game, but it's not reviewing a game because it's not reviewing a game like I would review a game, because there is clearly only one correct way to review a game.

You don't like people who let people support their endeavors?

>he's not a game reviewer, he's an experience reviewer

I can take this guy seriously because he puts the effort and is knowledgeable but the whole critique seems to part from a very subjective view on how to and how not to review games.

I assume it depends on the game. I think there are games that want to give players a certain experience moreso than just being interesting from a gameplay perspective. And of course the opposite exists where there's games that want to be fun games more than any sort of "artistic experience."

It's certainly fair to say that Matt leans towards experience-driven games, but I think he also talks about games with interesting mechanics to them, mainly in his shorter videos like Spacechem, Dustforce, Tetris, etc.

>he's not austistic enough!!

Is what I'm getting from this critique. I think everyone usually glosses over shit simply because talking about the art/overalldesign/story/controls/leveldesign is a huge undertaking and you can't just start from scratch as if video games never existed before said game before reviewing.

I do agree Matt gets into self absorbed comments once in awhile. Like that one time he talked about programming 101 in the middle of a dark souls review. But other than that I think a lot of his commentary has added to the "discussion" of games like wind waker where we can finally move past the common "sailing is too boring" and focus on other aspects.

I'd donate to his patreon if he released more than 1 video every semester

I feel this guy has the view that gameplay is ultimately the most important point to talk about in a game review, but I don't agree. Sometimes certain things can be left unspoken about it and if you say too much it feels like you are just trying to disassemble everything and explain it.

The book about Wario Land 4 he mentions is a good example. It's not a bad review, far from it, it's just way too extensive on basic game mechanics. A lot can be left without mention.

apparently he's gonna try to upload more often with shorter videos. Said he's happy to have made the Devil May Cry commentary, but recognizes not everyone wanted to see that.

When's his SMT review?

I'm getting a bit of a "film snob" type of feel but with videogames. Also he seems to cherry pick a bit too much for my liking in that critique, like he talks a lot about the Pacman video which is one of his weaker videos.

Then he mentions Matthew didn't mention things about SotC like the fur and stone aspects of the colossus, which are just very basic things to even gloss over. Or he gets really mad that he didn't like the HUD and completely invalidates it as an opinion for some reason when it's actually a valid point to make.

So if a girl says hi to me in the corridor as a pass by, does it mean she might like me, or is she just trying to be nice?

Unlike his dick.

Seriously. That huge fucking thing is too heavy for the muscles to lift it. I don't know how he conceals it.

She's trying to be nice, user. Which is a sign that she either doesn't hate you, or she dislikes you.

Oh, ok...

But what if she remembers my name, does that mean she likes me because she knows who I am?

Girls generally remember names better than men and it's mostly just to keep their status up by coming across as a likable person.

>e-celeb thread
these need to be banned on sight.

Yeah, pretty fun