What went right? (With drown out as well)

Are you? You're the one spouting the same pointless bullshit that you got from other retards on Cred Forums without anything to back it up. Show me one example of a "paid" review

I'm not defending gaming journalism, in fact I think that shouldn't be considered something serious at all, an everyone should make their own reviews without being biased due to "pressure", but, I realized, that there's not (or there barely is) any "paid reviews".
This is simple as it gets: If you give a "negative" review towards a game, the developers won't invite you or any of your "journalists" colleagues to their private presentations, or prime-time releases, losing not only part of the coverage your "job" used to work on, but also, the publishers might stop working with you.

>TL;DR: you badmouth devs, you lose publishers, lose adds to put in your webpage (which means less money income), and also you lose the chance to keep doing "journalism" with those companies.

Yahtzee is shit and gay. I hope he gets ALS.

>he was funny until he talked shit about a bad game I like
FTFY

yahtzee is a sperg

Nah, I just never laugh, smile, or blow air out of my nose when I watch his videos. Same tired style of "comedy" for almost 10 years

see It's very obvious that reviewers are hesitant to be negative especially about certain companies and products.

This, there are huge incentives for reviewers to not be honest, but no one is actually taking real bribes.

I know, I want you to show me an example of someone getting paid for a review

What shitty game did he pick on that made you this ass blasted?

He actually makes games, so he has a decent level of insight

...

cinemablend.com/games/Publisher-Admits-Game-Review-Scores-Heavily-Influenced-By-Trips-Parties-Swag-48395.html

p4rgaming.com/ex-ign-employee-leaks-list-of-review-scores-for-games-that-arent-even-close-to-release-like-gta-v/

zeldainformer.com/news/former-ign-employee-admits-review-scores-are-skewed-due-to-public-relations

theverge.com/2016/7/12/12157310/pewdiepie-youtubers-sponsored-videos-ftc-warner-bros

engadget.com/2016/07/12/warner-bros-ftc-settlement-paid-game-reviews/

forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2014/01/22/report-ea-paying-youtube-content-creators-for-positive-video-game-coverage/#1d2eb6f72113

reaxxion.com/1238/3-ways-game-reviewers-are-bribed-to-lie-to-you

kys senpai

Can you even read, you retarded anime poster?

>go on the escapist
>the only shit left is yahtzee and that one shitty webcomic

This.

LittleBigPlanet was great. Yahtzee just hates platformers.

>someone doesn't like what I like
>they must be so butthurt haha

>I want you to show me an example of someone getting paid for a review

>(examples of someone getting paid for a review)

>Can you even read

like I said, kys

>(examples of someone getting paid for a review)
You didn't, you showed me Pewdiepie getting paid to make a video about a game. I want game journalists getting paid for reviews. Where are the examples? There must be tons, for all the times memespouters repeat the same "paid reviews" garbage in every thread

I was asking for pier reviews from the UN or from scientific journals you troglodyte, not gossip rags.

He said he liked it, but he didn't like concept of games relying on user-made content, like it and Spore.
>"But the level design is really good, like...something good...that's...made of chocolate."

I can't believe these are real posts lmao

Alright i'm done then. Literally the first 3 links are literally what you're trying to ask for right now but you ignored everything else. If you're a game reviewer or something, do what you do but don't waste people's time in anonymous image boards.

>paid review memers don't know what a game review is
Amazing

Take the belt off your neck dude, your auto-erotic asphyxiation is affecting your judgement.

>forbes is a gossip rag
hmm, how about dem goalposts.

>reviews are influenced by swag
>"leaked" scores that don't even match the actual scores (you'd know this if you bothered to do a second of research before posting)
>reviews are skewed
So you're an illiterate retard then. Gotcha

kk nice ad-hom btw.

he has assburgers with a side of fires

>

tfw no more drown out

Just read the Cred Forums sticky and looking to flex your new vocabulary eh?

He's making money out of what Cred Forums does for free and that triggers Cred Forums. I will always love him for that.

>I was asking for pier reviews from the UN or from scientific journals
Actually kekd

Video games are for unloved children and I don't know why anyone would play them, let alone watch videos of frown men talking about them

Cred Forums hates him because he hates Nintendo.

The new livestreams are boring as shit. Technical help co host is bland and apparently only temporary anyway. Also very quick to lean on "questions from the chat" which because it is a livestream are unfiltered.

When does he do livestreams?

The consistency, I guess. Getting people hooked on a schedule of releases and seldom breaking that schedule is pretty cool.

We were talking about BRIBES.

>cinemablend.com/games/Publisher-Admits-Game-Review-Scores-Heavily-Influenced-By-Trips-Parties-Swag-48395.html

While the publisher admitted that they don't directly put checks in the pockets of journalists, they do wine and dine them in other ways to influence review scores in order to get a better Metacritic posting.

>p4rgaming.com/ex-ign-employee-leaks-list-of-review-scores-for-games-that-arent-even-close-to-release-like-gta-v/

“Unfortunately, a typical reader of IGN only cares for the number at the end of the review”
The employee also says that IGN does not directly get paid by publishers for the scores but rather “gets paid to advertise for the game.”

>zeldainformer.com/news/former-ign-employee-admits-review-scores-are-skewed-due-to-public-relations

Essentially in order to continue to get review copies of games, to get certain publishers to advertise on your site, things get altered to appear more favorable for certain games.

Took me five minutes. Those you didn't take to actually read the articles, and I won't keep going because the rest might be the same.

TL;DR: If you actually and unironically believe gaming journalism and youtubers, you are as easly impressionable as a child, you have no personality but the one the media created for you, you don't have your own opinion, and I have very bad news for you... you are far away from getting out of that bubble.

he's funny, and right most of the time

he's also one of those "lean left but anti-SJW" types

a modern day Seanbaby

>While the publisher admitted that they don't directly put checks in the pockets of journalists, they do wine and dine them in other ways to influence review scores in order to get a better Metacritic posting.
Is wineing and dining not a bribe?

>He believes p4r is a real source.

After the zero punctuation vids come out. 2 so far. He plays whatever got reviewed that week.

Is that on YouTube or on the Escapist? I'd be interested in checking them out, but they're released a week later on YouTube, right?

>p4rgaming.com

So if someone invites you to a fancy place and let you eat and sleep for free, as long as he/she prods your butthole with a dragon dildo, would you let him/her?

If you are not a faggot, you won't.

And if the "journalists" are as half as smart and logical than that, it means they won't change their point of view of their own "professional" opinion towards a game.

Not me, but this faggot does.

Also >He believes gaming "journalism" is a "professional" source.

Keep watching Faggot "Scream at the screen because I believe I'm funny" Pie, edgelord.

If I was reviewing a movie and the director offered me a blowjob I would put that in my review. "I think this game is great and it has nothing to do with the blowjob. It was the threesome with the director and his sister."

>"What went right" thread
>Posts nitpicks
sasuga Cred Forums

>So if someone invites you to a fancy place and let you eat and sleep for free, as long as he/she prods your butthole with a dragon dildo, would you let him/her?
>If you are not a faggot, you won't.
>And if the "journalists" are as half as smart and logical than that, it means they won't change their point of view of their own "professional" opinion towards a game.
You know you can take bribe money, and then not deliver right? It's the same as being wined and dined. Taking bribe money doesn't force you to do what you were bribed for.

You know how the industry works, dude.

I would do the same. However, that blowjob won't change the score of my review.
Actually, I would give two scores about it: One for the movie, and the other one for the blowjob.

>I would give two scores about it: One for the movie, and the other one for the blowjob.
I'll kickstart you if you try to fund a youtube show based on that.

-REMINDER-

Even Yahtz has fallen for the OUTRAGE

youtube.com/watch?v=xTKkQ5VCW7g

>Show me one example of a "paid" review
Have you been living under a rock? It's common knowledge that big sites like IGN don't give bad scores to games whose publishers shower them in money.

There was one guy who got sacked because he gave Kane and Lynch a terrible score after the publisher paid a lot of money for ads on their site.

Wasn't that my point?

I was showing how delusional he/she is by thinking "bribes" makes a difference towards gaming "journalism".

And then the person who gave you money just has to say "we gave him money so he's not trustworthy". You'll be fucked more than they are.

>It's common knowledge
So show me an example. Show me a review that took money for a good review.

At least google it you fucking nigger
reaxxion.com/1238/3-ways-game-reviewers-are-bribed-to-lie-to-you

Reviewers being bribed isn't even something they're hiding these days.

In other words, gaming sites and game reviews are just part of the marketing machinery.

Which boils down to gaming sites getting paid to help publishers sell more (AAA) games.

If they write positive things about (AAA) games they get access to exclusive news and are paid lots of money by the publisher for ads on their site. If they write bad things all that shit stops and they die.

But, to be perfectly honest, gaming sites and reviews aren't really needed anymore, now that we have shit like twitter or even Steam reviews.

Yes but my point is
If you are wined and dined, or bribed, you do not have to do what the briber wants. That doesn't mean there won't be repercussions. Being wined and dined is still the same as being bribed.

Again, show me a reviewer that took money for a good review. You still can't do it

Right? Its one of the deadest goddamn sites I have ever seen now. Whether you liked it or not at least 5 years ago there was actual fucking content on there.

>What went right?
He stopped doing videos with the cucked Whale.

You're some kind of mental midget, aren't you?

Publisher: "Give our games good reviews and we'll give you lots of money for ads and pay for two weeks of vacation in a five-star-hotel for your staff."

How is that not being bribed to write positive reviews and news coverage?

He doesn't give a fuck about political correctness and constructs some weird-ass metaphors that get a chuckle out of me from time to time.

Also, he focuses on the negative things about a game but also mentions the good things very briefly. And he does it all in five minutes.

>took
>money
>for
>review
How can you still not read? It's a simple thing I'm asking, and if they "aren't even trying to hide it anymore", you should have plenty of examples right? I'm asking for one.

>They give me free stuff, either I can badmouth their shitty game and stop getting free stuff or I can keep leeching their desperated attemps to seduce me, by talking good shit about this piece of garbage, so the teenedgers buy it.

Gee, I don't know who is the guilty one here, the "journalists" they pretend to buy, or the companies that LITERALLY gives them shit for free. Oh, the "journalists" are the villains, by decieving us with shitty games in exchange for freebies...
Or maybe I'm the stupid one here that gets influeced by youtuber's opinions.

Learn to make your own point of view.
Is not bad to see other's opinion, but, if you stick just to one of those, you are totally biased.

So why doesn't yahtzee move his videos from escapist to his channel? I don't want to give escapist dosh.

Dude is either hiding behind very, very specific wording or he's a tard. Either way you're wasting your breath.

You really are a mental midget. I just described to you how gaming sites are being paid for providing positive coverage. If you can't see that there is something wrong with your brain and you should stay away from sharp objects and fire.

A- that's a different guy. I left the thread a long time ago.

B- I already posted a fucking list of links including a fucking forbes article, you simply disregarded everything you didn't want to argue

C- You are quite literally moving the goalposts by saying it doesn't count as a bribe when it isn't literal money exchanging hands being shown on a fucking ledger while arguing that proven attempts to sway reviews don't count because reasons.

10/10 bait.

Because he gets paid by The Escapist to put his shit on their website?

>paid for providing positive coverage
There is no obligation to give good reviews for any of the things you listed. If giving free shit away for good scores actually worked, no AAA game would get bad scores. You can't show an example of a reviewer getting paid for a score because there are no examples.

Hes looking for the word "money" because he doesnt consider anything but money a bribe

Autism : The post

>I already posted a fucking list of links including a fucking forbes article
You didn't post one article that featured a reviewer getting paid for a good score

>You are quite literally moving the goalposts by saying it doesn't count as a bribe
Because they aren't explicitly bribing them you fucking idiot. They aren't giving away shit in exchange for good scores, they're just giving away shit. Again, if that worked to get good scores, no AAA game would get a bad review.

But it's already dead like pointed out. I assume only yahtzee is keeping them alive

See Again, if you, as a "journalist", change your review in order to please the publishers, then you shoudn't be considered professional at all, no matter the kind of "influence" or "sweet-talking" they shove into you, making the "bribes/incentive" meaningless.

As I said befofe, if you talk shit about their games, you are not losing "the bribes". Instead, you are getting no further contact with the publishers, which means no income from ads and no more jobs or interviews with them. On the other hand, if you say something "good" about it, you not only won't be fired or lose contact with them, but also you will STILL get freebies.

That's why I don't consider gaming "journalism" as something professional. Not only for the "journalists" per say, but also for the lack of alternatives these guys have towards this kind of situation, whey they are not working independently.

look up the definition of a bribe

why did lets drown out end

Who is arguing that journalists should be considered professional? People are saying 'professional journalists' are being bribed - because they are, there is evidence for it. Whether you consider them to be professional, and whether they deserve to be called professional, is irrelevant.

Do you know it? The reviewer has no obligation to fulfill their end of the "bargain" by giving good scores here, because there is no bargain being made. The publisher is just giving away stuff, and the reviewer has no obligation to do anything after they take it.

If I was the President of Russia and I gave a politician 10 million dollars it would be unethical for them to not announce that it had been done. Pull your head out of your arse mate.

What's your favorite Yahtzee review?

For me it's by far his FF13 one.

youtube.com/watch?v=KmnAL60mfSg

I agreed with literally every point he made.

that is what a bribe is dummy. Its still a bribe regardless as to the actions of the bribee. The gift giver's intentions are what make it a bribe.

that was actually the one that made me start watching his videos.

>If I was the President of Russia and I gave a politician 10 million dollars it would be unethical for them to not announce that it had been done
What the fuck is this analogy? You know the "bribes" that you're talking about aren't done in secret, right?

So by your definition anyone takes a press copy and nothing else is being "bribed!" because the publisher is giving their game to the reviewer hoping that they give it a good score

>You know the "bribes" that you're talking about aren't done in secret, right?
If someone has been wined and dined and given a handjob by an advertiser or publisher it's their duty to say "Here's the game, by the way they gave me a dutch anchor but that has not affected the scores." By pretending you didn't get shit from the publishers you're purposely being disingenuous. That's why steam reviews now show which reviewers have received the game for free, so you can have a more objective view.

Mine's actually Darksiders youtube.com/watch?v=EWTSeTxKLJo

It's basically a fantastic joke almost every sentence, and Yahtz actually seem to have some energy for his hatred here, rather than just being bored, fucking brilliant review.

Yet that proves my point.
Even if that can be considered a "bribe", there's still some "journalists" that might (or might not, too, of course) keep their opinion towards a game, either positive or negative, making the "bribe" useless, and, by thus, not influencing the outcome.
I need to mention, for a third time, that "journalists" are not influenced by the "bribes" but for the consequences their reviews might reach. That was my point since the beginning.

I'm not saying they are not being influenced. I'm saying they ARE influenced, but not by "bribes" but for the pressure the publishers put on them.
The "bribes" are a plus of freebies in exchange of being "good boys".

>So by your definition anyone takes a press copy and nothing else is being "bribed!" because the publisher is giving their game to the reviewer hoping that they give it a good score
Please keep posting. You're hilarious.

>By pretending you didn't get shit from the publishers you're purposely being disingenuous.
No one's "pretending", you have no idea what you're talking about. Some even do unboxing videos of the free stuff they get.

Is the fact that it looks like a giant penis supposedto be a joke?

Too scared to reply to me, faggot?

lol

>No one's "pretending",
You certainly seem to be.

he's not pretending. He's actually retarded

What? No is hiding the fact that publishers send them press kits, you fucking idiot.

You just posted it. Quite possibly his only review where all of his criticisms were 100% on point.

Mine was Condemned 2

This is your parents, everyone-who-posted-in-this-thread. I am so dissapointed in you. You can do better than this.

I love his Painkiller review.

There's Cred Forums in heaven?

When a parent dies, their mind is added to those who passed before them. I am that conglomerate consciousness. I am the All-father.

Go to your room.

I am in my room. I have a one bedroom apartment.

If you were my real parents you'd know that, you devillish imposter!

dont mind me, posting superior game reviewer and PLAYER

Oblivion.
youtube.com/watch?v=qvz3ANcAvSc

This is going to sound fucking wierd but I swear hearing soapy tit wank and seeing the dumb characters act it out gave me that fetish when I was in my early teens.

I don't suppose anyone can relate?

>PLAYER
Yahtzee's a scrub but i don't think he's that much of a scrub.

The correct answer is Wolfenstein.

kek

RE5

In the tumultuos time before D-day,
there once was a man named BJ,
with chocalate box hair and a face like a bear
and a jacket he picked up on ebay.

youtube.com/results?search_query=zero punctuation demon's souls

He basically said "It's an okay platformer with some good level design, but the core gameplay is very bland." He's given some very fond reviews to platformer-type games before (Shovel Knight, Rayman Origins). His main issue with LBP was that he thought relying on user-made content meant that the experience would lead to sifting through lots of terrible, derivative, or gimmicky user-made levels (which he brought up again in Super Mario Maker, noting that all the top-rated levels were "hey don't move while looking at this cool thing I made" or Kaizo knockoffs.)

>"...Which I was thinking I should go back and try again sometime, but apparently we don't count it anymore..."

The fact that he managed to give such a wonderfully on-point review despite being only a tenth of the way into the game is pretty funny.

Also, I think it's funny when Yahtzee accidentally predicts plot twists. Turns out he was right about Mindjack.

RE6 is pretty beautiful, too.

>...another online gameplay mode I kind of liked involves taking control of a monster in someone else's game, which provides great opportunity to avenge those fingertips. I got a little satisfaction from knifing to death some stranger who might not have deserved it, but that was one out of ten attempts. The rest either didn't connect or I'd join five seconds before the guy got killed by a regular non-self aware monster. It's disheartening to know your job could be done equally as well by a pixel-brained bleep-bloop non-controlled twat.

>Which, come to think of it, might as well be the motto of Resident Evil 6. It doesn't want a player, this linear, quick-time-event-speckled parade of meaningless twaddle, it wants a little ducky it can drag along on a piece of string. Show it a bunch of sparkly lights and then smack it when it doesn't seem impressed.

So what is to keep someone from posting honest reviews under alternate identity/alias while putting the generic "Everything is Awesome" under their real name reviews ?

Zero Punctuation got old and overplayed his own jokes, getting stale somewhere around the time of Brawl review or when he started having a generic intro compared to what he used to do.

Alot of his newer content feels more forced when it comes to looking for negatives of the games that he played compared to how he did his reviews when first starting out. I get why, you can only run on the same shtick for so long, but that doesn't really excuse it.