Jump to content

Holy shit the balls on Filip Miucin


Paperclyp

Recommended Posts

The games enthusiast press is mostly made up of kids in their 20s, who barely earn anything, who are constantly churned -- to ensure they stay cheap.

 

"Criticism", like that seen of other media,  in games reviews on most of the big sites is mostly nonexistent.  And its likely to stay that way as long as it is the purview of inexperienced, poorly paid 25-year olds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

While there's an art to criticism, I'd hardly care to see the language for game reviews 'mature.'  There's a lot more that can be stated objectively compared to other mediums (ie: how is the framerate, how glitchy, etc).  I expect there to be some clinical sounding stuff in there.  It's not a bad thing, IMO.  More direct can be good.

 

Some outlets, like Edge, have turned me off completely because they write reviews with so much fluff.  I find myself trusting the reviewer much less if that's part of my takeaway.

 

5 hours ago, darkness35 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if the added fluff is due to word count requirements for the reviews.

 

 

I find youtube videos have the same issues. Many will add fluff and filler seemingly to hit some magic run time around 10 minutes for the purpose of monetization. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikechorney said:

The games enthusiast press is mostly made up of kids in their 20s, who barely earn anything, who are constantly churned -- to ensure they stay cheap.

 

"Criticism", like that seen of other media,  in games reviews on most of the big sites is mostly nonexistent.  And its likely to stay that way as long as it is the purview of inexperienced, poorly paid 25-year olds.

 

Technically, the inexperienced 25 year olds are the ones masking the money with reviews on YouTube.  Maybe they're the smart ones.

 

9 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

 

I find youtube videos have the same issues. Many will add fluff and filler seemingly to hit some magic run time around 10 minutes for the purpose of monetization. 

 

Easy Allies Reviews are good about avoiding this mostly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikechorney said:

The games enthusiast press is mostly made up of kids in their 20s, who barely earn anything, who are constantly churned -- to ensure they stay cheap.

 

"Criticism", like that seen of other media,  in games reviews on most of the big sites is mostly nonexistent.  And its likely to stay that way as long as it is the purview of inexperienced, poorly paid 25-year olds.

I would need some data to know if this is true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

I would need some data to know if this is true. 

Click on any IGN or Gamespot review.  Look at their picture on twitter.  Try to find one person who has been doing reviews there for 10 years (let alone 20).

 

15 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Technically, the inexperienced 25 year olds are the ones masking the money with reviews on YouTube.  Maybe they're the smart ones.

 

 

Easy Allies Reviews are good about avoiding this mostly. 

Actually, I think the ones making money are streaming on twitch, rather than doing reviews on YouTube...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

 

I find youtube videos have the same issues. Many will add fluff and filler seemingly to hit some magic run time around 10 minutes for the purpose of monetization. 

 

27 minutes ago, mikechorney said:

 

 

Actually, I think the ones making money are streaming on twitch, rather than doing reviews on YouTube...

The thing with Youtube is the monetization changes that basically fucks over content creators unless they upload videos of specific minimal lengths every day.  This fucks over creators who put effort into putting videos, whereas creators who just do simple shit like clickbait or  stream highlights get better revenue in the long run.  There's a partial reason why shit channels like Synapse basically steal content from other streamers for monteziation revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mikechorney said:

Click on any IGN or Gamespot review.  Look at their picture on twitter.  Try to find one person who has been doing reviews there for 10 years (let alone 20).

But a lot of the older dudes are still around, they just change publications or start their own stuff. 

 

And I’m more talking about your claims of salary. I doubt they make a killing, but at the same time I have no clue what they’re being paid. I’m not sure anyone does, really. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mikechorney said:

Click on any IGN or Gamespot review.  Look at their picture on twitter.  Try to find one person who has been doing reviews there for 10 years (let alone 20).

 

Actually, I think the ones making money are streaming on twitch, rather than doing reviews on YouTube...

 

It's ALWAYS been like that at IGN. I don't even think I was of drinking age yet back when I wrote for them. These sites just churn through kids. There just isn't a lot of money to be made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

How the fuck do you even wind up in a situation where plagiarism for a goddamn video game review video is even necessary?

 

I write like 30+ pages of opinion for every game I play, and that's to people who don't even want to read it! The words flow like water! Just say what you think about the game! It's so easy! Although if I were to do videos I'd probably have to hire an entire team of editors to trim down the bullshit I type up so every video wouldn't be 4 hours long.

This is exactly how I feel. Give me a couple of hours to play a game and give my thoughts. I'm not writing about boring theories, literature from 200 years ago, or or developing a large report or my supervisor that they may only take a sentence or two out of. 

 

Like others stated, maybe he's just a lazy bum looking to make money the easiest way possible. But I get you, when I talk about a game whether I enjoyed it or not, my thoughts flow like pipe that won't stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/12/2018 at 1:29 PM, crispy4000 said:

 

While there's an art to criticism, I'd hardly care to see the language for game reviews 'mature.'  There's a lot more that can be stated objectively compared to other mediums (ie: how is the framerate, how glitchy, etc).  I expect there to be some clinical sounding stuff in there.  It's not a bad thing, IMO.  More direct can be good.

 

Some outlets, like Edge, have turned me off completely because they write reviews with so much fluff.  I find myself trusting the reviewer much less if that's part of my takeaway.

Those technical metrics could be summarized in an offset box while a more substantive critique predominates the narrative text.  The longer the language of game criticism takes to mature, the longer it will take for the medium to be taken seriously as a legitimate art form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if I find those parts the most substantive?  That's often the case in reviews today.  Not that I blame them, when most of the bigger pain points in games tend to be mechanical.


Also, I don't care if video games get taken seriously as legitimate art.  Just like I don't care if eSports gets taken seriously as legitimate sport.   Enough people are into them that those attempting to deny them a space are blowing farts in the wind.  That's all the legitimacy they need.

 

I have a PhD in classical piano.  I've learned enough about highbrow criticism to know it's a bubble.  No artistic medium needs that to thrive or be recognized. 
In some cases, it's actually a preservation reflex when the culture stops paying attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

What if I find those parts the most substantive?  That's often the case in reviews today.  Not that I blame them, when most of the bigger pain points in games tend to be mechanical.


Also, I don't care if video games get taken seriously as legitimate art.  Just like I don't care if eSports gets taken seriously as legitimate sport.   Enough people are into them that those attempting to deny them a space are blowing farts in the wind.  That's all the legitimacy they need.

 

I have a PhD in classical piano.  I've learned enough about highbrow criticism to know it's a bubble.  No artistic medium needs that to thrive or be recognized. 
In some cases, it's actually a preservation reflex when the culture stops paying attention.

There’s a spectrum between the typical review style we saw for decades and elitism. I don’t think wade is suggesting we start only writing highbrow better than thou stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

There’s a spectrum between the typical review style we saw for decades and elitism. I don’t think wade is suggesting we start only writing highbrow better than thou stuff. 


No, but the idea that games are stuck in some battle for legitimacy contingent on criticism is false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:


No, but the idea that games are stuck in some battle for legitimacy contingent on criticism is false.

It's not solely contingent on criticism, but that is a large part of it. Games may be mainstream as hell, but they are not held in the same regard as other mediums. 

 

Now, it's up to you whether or not you give a shit about that, and I don't think anyone is saying you're wrong if you don't, but I agree that we need to progress in how games at large are critiqued. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Paperclyp said:

It's not solely contingent on criticism, but that is a large part of it. Games may be mainstream as hell, but they are not held in the same regard as other mediums. 

 

Now, it's up to you whether or not you give a shit about that, and I don't think anyone is saying you're wrong if you don't, but I agree that we need to progress in how games at large are critiqued. 

 

If games aren't regarded up to the same snuff as other mediums, it's not because of the reviews that dedicated console/PC gamers consume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

If games aren't regarded up to the same snuff as other mediums, it's not because of the reviews that dedicated console/PC gamers consume.

 

So it plays no role? What exactly is your position here? You’re shooting down my views without offering anything in the way of reasoning. If you disagree, fine, but there’s not much else to say if that’s all you are gonna say lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

 

So it plays no role? What exactly is your position here? You’re shooting down my views without offering anything in the way of reasoning. If you disagree, fine, but there’s not much else to say if that’s all you are gonna say lol. 


Thought I've already been cut and dry in this thread.  I'll summarize my thoughts with a few more words to go by:

 

1. The quality of writing in video game reviews has little to do with people taking gaming seriously as an art form.  Reviews aren't holding the medium back from gaining legitimacy.  The industry is already finding it itself as a growing mainstream form of entertainment.

2.  The culture of Youtube/Twitch streamers have subverted the influence of traditional media outlets like IGN.  Gamers generally aren't as interested in "editorial" reviews as much as they used to be.  More of us want opinions and gameplay presented by personalities.  Good writing is optional.  Or even a script to begin with.

 

3. Clinical language is to be expected from video game reviews.  Typically, game mechanics & technical issues are where the greatest mistakes are made, and will often be "the most substantive critique."  This is more a reflection on what the games medium is, not a sign of immature criticism.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:


Thought I've already been cut and dry in this thread.  I'll summarize my thoughts with a few more words to go by:

 

1. The quality of writing in video game reviews has little to do with people taking gaming seriously as an art form.  Reviews aren't holding the medium back from gaining legitimacy.  The industry is already finding it itself as a growing mainstream form of entertainment.

2.  The culture of Youtube/Twitch streamers have subverted the influence of traditional media outlets like IGN.  Gamers generally aren't as interested in "editorial" reviews as much as they used to be.  More of us want opinions and gameplay presented by personalities.  Good writing is optional.  Or even a script to begin with.

 

3. Clinical language is to be expected from video game reviews.  Typically, the mechanics & technical shortcomings of a game are where the greatest mistakes are made, in which case it should be "the most substantive critique."  This is more a reflection on what the games medium is, not a sign of immature criticism.

 

1. Being mainstream and being taken seriously as an art form are not synonymous. It’s not as cut and dry as you’re making it, either. It’s not just about gamers reading reviews: developers read what good critics say and take it to heart. Well written reviews with legitimate criticism, along with good journalism, have improved the industry and will continue to do so. Streamers do not affect the industry nearly as much in this manner, as I’ll get to below. It wasn’t that long ago Nintendo had girls in bikinis with DS’s chained to their bodies (or whatever it was). 

 

2. There are a multitude of issues with streamers as the main influencers of the industry. They very well may be, but that is not a good thing. They are essentially paid advertisers as well as trying to maximize their own brand. I could go on. 

 

3. I disagree. As wade said before, the mechanical stuff can be outlined in a breakout box of addressed as needed in the review. But those things - while useful - absolutely are relics of how video game reviews started out. It’s a running joke now for vets who talk about adding up all the categories to spit out a score. It is immature and it is going away, which is a good thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

1. Being mainstream and being taken seriously as an art form are not synonymous. It’s not as cut and dry as you’re making it, either. It’s not just about gamers reading reviews: developers read what good critics say and take it to heart. Well written reviews with legitimate criticism, along with good journalism, have improved the industry and will continue to do so. Streamers do not affect the industry nearly as much in this manner, as I’ll get to below. It wasn’t that long ago Nintendo had girls in bikinis with DS’s chained to their bodies (or whatever it was). 

 

2. There are a multitude of issues with streamers as the main influencers of the industry. They very well may be, but that is not a good thing. They are essentially paid advertisers as well as trying to maximize their own brand. I could go on. 

 

3. I disagree. As wade said before, the mechanical stuff can be outlined in a breakout box of addressed as needed in the review. But those things - while useful - absolutely are relics of how video game reviews started out. It’s a running joke now for vets who talk about adding up all the categories to spit out a score. It is immature and it is going away, which is a good thing. 


1.  I agree with most of that to a degree, but would still stop short of saying critics have a significant impact in the acceptance of a medium as 'serious' art.  The public has the big say.  Not only in determining what is profitable, but in keeping an art form active and culturally significant.


2.  None of that discounts their influence on mainstream culture.  Traditional reviewers don't have the same reach as they do.  There's downsides, but I think the net is positive.  A lot more people are staying engaged with games today because of them.

3.  A breakout box like that is still badly compartmentalizing a review.  Maybe as a snapshot, okay, that's fine.  But game mechanics are generally too much of what makes a game good or bad to be segmented out like that.  Same with technical issues, if they're egregious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brick said:

Holy shit. I really want to hear this guy's excuse now that even more plagiarism examples have been found. 

Filip Miucin tweets “Fake News. The media is out to get me” and then gets hired by the White House as its Communication Director. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Paperclyp said:

There’s a spectrum between the typical review style we saw for decades and elitism. I don’t think wade is suggesting we start only writing highbrow better than thou stuff. 

Not at all suggesting that. I know professional reviews need to be more critical of things for an audience but it should stil be fun for the writer and the gaming audience but with proper writing and integrity. Lord knows I don't want to read highbrow stuff about video games, lol. I read all that stuff in academia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

I haven't done this yet, but I saw that if you read this article while watching the following video, it's a mind fuck. I'll try to confirm this later unless someone does it first.

 

 

EDIT: One paragraph in. Holy fucking shit, I'm trippin'

WOW.....................  You guys really need to listen to that video while reading the text.  What a fucking loser.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...