Has Extra Credit replaced Zero Punctuation as this site biggest video series?

[David Bray]

Obvious hate is obvious.

Extra Credits promotes discussion. And if you look at Yahtzee as the draw, with Extra punctuation they're running about equal.

 

[hexFrank202]

Gah, I dunno. I guess I'll just be glad I'm not alone in not considering EC to be the next Messiah.

So far I've sat through all the EC videos (other than those special ones at some convention or something) and they've held my attention, I'll say that. You seem to like the show less than I do, because I wouldn't call him "smug" as much as I would call him a bit of a hack. (And I'd take the later over the former any day.)

Ultimately: Extra Credits is a beginner's show for video game commentary. Anyone who already knows everything he's talking about either has already watched tons of games commentary before, or you're like me and spend every night restlessly pacing the floor thinking, just thinking like a maniac.

 

[ThreeKneeNick]

Honestly i watched two episodes of Extra Credits and did not find them to be either informative or funny, i did not bother watching any since. ZP still rules in my book.

 

[Matt-the-twat]

Never heard of Extra Credits until this thread? That said I only watch ZP and trawl through these forums, don't bother looking for any new videos as anything I have watched *cough*unskippable*cough* has been a complete waste of time.

 

[Withall]

Extra Credits gives you food for thought. Zero Punctuation makes you crack up and go "yeah, that's true". They both serve their purpose, and are both worth the watch.

 

[Harbinger_]

I don't see why both can't be equally as popular.

 

[Glamorgan]

No, not yet. It should have, but it hasn't got the fanboys to surpass ZP.

 

[Chainsauce]

Does it matter? Both are awesome shows.

 

[Frequen-Z]

Bigger than ZP? No.

Better than ZP? Yes.

 

[jackpipsam]

No, there two different shows! one is reviewing and the other is information.
ZP is a review show. it got popular because its funny. EC is a whole new type of show, so people are watching it for that.
people watch both!

 

[thenumberthirteen]

Comments is a bad way to measure since Extra Credits provokes far more discussion as it is a discussion show. They're both great and both draw in lots of traffic. I still rate ZP as top dog.

 

[Virgil]

... is to look at the amount of comments that the episodes have.

As someone that does know all the numbers, I can tell you unequivocally that the number of comments is no indication of how many people watch or read any particular piece of content on the site.

 

[rockyoumonkeys]

I hope not. Honestly, I'm not a fan of Extra Credits. Only watched one episode, but it was far too preachy for me.

 

[boholikeu]

... is to look at the amount of comments that the episodes have.

As someone that does know all the numbers, I can tell you unequivocally that the number of comments is no indication of how many people watch or read any particular piece of content on the site.

Of course, that also raises the question of how we should judge which show is more successful. Is number of views more important than the ability to get your viewers to actually stay on the site and have a discussion about the show?

 

[Virgil]

Of course, that also raises the question of how we should judge which show is more successful. Is number of views more important than the ability to get your viewers to actually stay on the site and have a discussion about the show?

Yes, significantly, at least when determining the financial viability of keeping any certain type of content running. The ad views are what pay for everything, so views are what win out. That's not to say that the people behind the content don't like the comments - I know the staff do, and I'm sure the creators do, but when it comes to numbers, that's the one we have to care about. That's why we have the little message under all the videos that says that if you like something, you should tell other people

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

If the EC crew was using yellow wallpaper and little black spikey guys then I'd call them a rip-off.

I was just using that term to put in as much potential irony into the situation.

 

[hexFrank202]

No, there two different shows! one is reviewing and the other is information.
ZP is a review show. it got popular because its funny. EC is a whole new type of show, so people are watching it for that.
people watch both!

You either put almost no thought into this post, or you have a very confused and inarticulate understanding of what you're talking about.

1
EC is "information". What? How is it information? You mean like game guides, or gaming news? It's obviously not that. EC is as much "information" as the characters in this post are "information". I think you're trying to say "one is reviewing and the other is commentary of game design."

2
EC. Is. Not. A. Whole. New. Type. Of. Show. It may be the first full-fledged game design commentary on the Escapist, but it's not new. It's been done countless times before. I know that you can't say that it isn't a good show JUST because it's not 100% original*, it just can't be handed a trophy so bright as "whole new type of show".

*You CAN, however, say it isn't a good show because of how repetitive and borderline pretentious it is.

 

[boholikeu]

Yes, significantly, at least when determining the financial viability of keeping any certain type of content running. The ad views are what pay for everything, so views are what win out. That's not to say that the people behind the content don't like the comments - I know the staff do, and I'm sure the creators do, but when it comes to numbers, that's the one we have to care about. That's why we have the little message under all the videos that says that if you like something, you should tell other people

Interesting, I always assumed that shows that encouraged repeat visits (thus maybe getting people to view other content on the site/become active on the boards and consequently viewing more ads) were just as important.