No Right Answer: Not a good show

[artanis_neravar]

Did you ever do debate in school? (honest question not trying to be condescending or anything) You often don't get to debate your actual opinion.

Also I would assume that sometimes their actual opinion has more to do with personal feeling rather than any evidence, so instead of choosing what they actually believe they choose what they believe they can support. Say for worst super hero death they actually believed the Captain Americas death was the worst, but they just didn't have any real evidence other than their personal distaste for, that would make for a poor debate.

Your argument falls flat in two ways:
---
The are not participating in a schooling exercise, the are making a show. They control the content on their own show and thus can choose what to debate and what to support. You can argue for or against everything that ever existed ever, even intangible guessing.

I take it that you watch and enjoy the show. Now, deep breath, big honesty. Do you actually think that anything they say would actually win a real debate? You can't argue that they're trying to make the best arguments because they clearly aren't.
---
But as was already pointed out, it's not actually a serious and real debate, and I never asked it to be. I asked it to look professional because it's being published. You could say that Tippy was asking for that, but you'd be wrong. He was asking for these people to stand behind their production... and they don't.

What is a real debate? who is judging this debate?

For the most part yes, they do make the best arguments

 

[artanis_neravar]

Incidentally, I just thought of what would be a great meta episode: Worst Show on the Escapist.

And then, instead of arguing between themselves and Feed Dump, they'd argue between Space Janitors and Miracle of Sound.

Does this mean that you think Feed Dump and No Right Answer are the wost shows on the Escapist (I'm inferring this from "instead of arguing between themselves and Feed Dump" makes it seem like you believe these are the obvious choices)

 

[Pebkio]

Does this mean that you think Feed Dump and No Right Answer are the wost shows on the Escapist (I'm inferring this from "instead of arguing between themselves and Feed Dump" makes it seem like you believe these are the obvious choices)

Why yes, yes I did. I think these two two shows are a waste of time and someone (with better equipment more clever than me) should make shows that replace them. But that is just a personal opinion, half of which I explained in a wall of text.

BUT! BUTT! Did you notice how, almost innocuously, I gave consideration to other shows other people might find to be worse?

Ha! Served back! Now I guess... it's on...

 

[artanis_neravar]

Does this mean that you think Feed Dump and No Right Answer are the wost shows on the Escapist (I'm inferring this from "instead of arguing between themselves and Feed Dump" makes it seem like you believe these are the obvious choices)

Why yes, yes I did. I think these two two shows are a waste of time and someone (with better equipment more clever than me) should make shows that replace them. But that is just a personal opinion, half of which I explained in a wall of text.

BUT! BUTT! Did you notice how, almost innocuously, I gave consideration to other shows other people might find to be worse?

Ha! Served back! Now I guess... it's on...

Oh I wasn't trying to challenge you, it's just that since your least favorite shows are among my favorites, we obviously have a difference in taste, so there is no point in us arguing back and forth.

 

[Aaron Foltz]

I enjoy who's going to fail the spit take. People complain it's not polished? That's the charm of the show, they shoot from the hip unlike every other "critic" that's trying to make a name for themselves. This is like The Escapist's handicam version of "Afterhours" on cracked.com (imo) Two dudes sitting around trying to make each other laugh. Why is this a thread? Ah, yes. Because the internet is the breading ground for complainers (such as myself) to whine about what they don't like.

 

[Rack]

SAw it once, didn't find it entertaining or edifying and never watched it again. Some people must watch it though.

 

[the darknees abyss]

Eh I just see it as a show for laughs, not actual debating. Who cares about who wins? I just want to see how they prove their point .

this person right it just meant to be funny

 

[Flying Dagger]

I'm with the OP, Poorly polished, poorly scripted, annoying deliverance and more smug satisfaction than I can take, despite (or perhaps because) being the president of my universities debating society.
I'm pretty much the exact audience for the show, and I can't even stomach a whole episode...
I get that if I don't like it I probably should just ignore it, it just feels like a show that is tailored to me should entertain me.

 

[Lunar Templar]

It's a show for yucks.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong, but No Right Answer was never meant to be a serious, professional, indepth debate series. It's just two nerdy guys in front of a camera, knocking examples back and forth of why they're right, for a laugh.

Either you laugh at it or you don't.

The Jimquisition is actually trying to make a genuine point, but really sucked at it in the first couple of episodes, as revealed in the comments. And I've never heard anyone complain about No Right Answer except for now, so I don't see why they should change.

this^

if your taking NRA (wow >.> bad acronym ...) seriously, you've missed the point of the show entirely

 

[Daystar Clarion]

I love the show

Some interesting points are raised and it's done in a hilarious way.

That's all I really want in a show.

 

[Stu35]

Dude...can't you just watch something else? I mean, instead of waiting for a show you don't like to improve, you could just watch another show.

This.


It seems to me that the OP has put an awful lot of effort into something they don't like.

I mean, there's plenty of things I don't like, and I'll spend time going out researching them, to confirm my dislike of them and give me ammunition into arguments as to why I don't like them, but I wouldn't go out of my way to start a whole new thread about it...

I mean, I don't like much on the Escapist(No Right Answer being something I'm fairly indifferent to), I don't feel the need to post threads about it. Given that the OPs criticism seems to be trying to be constructive, it seems it would have been better served in an email to the guys who make it?

 

[Hero in a half shell]

I preferred it when they deliberately had the worst choices possible to argue with, so there literally was no right answer, because the best western is certainly not either Fiefel goes west or the wild wild west.

I still watch it occasionally, and every episode has one or two good laughs in it, but I wouldn't be an avid subscriber.

Feed Dump on the other hand is really hilarious. I love that show.

 

[burningdragoon]

So you're mad/annoyed that 2 friends improv-ing random debates aren't more professional? Don't get your hopes up, since that's kinda the whole point.

It's super silly and that's what I like about it.

Edit: Though I can see how someone looking for a "proper" debate show, wouldn't like it, that's not what it is.

 

[Asita]

For the most part yes, they do make the best arguments

...No, they really don't. Often the positions chosen imply a lack of familiarity with the subject matter and the arguments themselves are often awarded points in ways that imply a similar lack of familiarity on the part of the moderator and what's worse, they're often complete non-sequitor with no actual bearing on the topic at hand (and yet not far enough out there to be interpreted as a comedic attempt. If you'd like I can even go through a given video and explain why the arguments presented are not 'the best' even at a glance and what some stronger arguments would have been. Heck, I've done that before. One might argue that the argumentation is purposely unprofessional and nonsensical (in which case I'd argue that they don't take it far enough), but to say that these are the 'best arguments'...yeah, I don't buy it.

Dude...can't you just watch something else? I mean, instead of waiting for a show you don't like to improve, you could just watch another show.

This.


It seems to me that the OP has put an awful lot of effort into something they don't like.

I mean, there's plenty of things I don't like, and I'll spend time going out researching them, to confirm my dislike of them and give me ammunition into arguments as to why I don't like them, but I wouldn't go out of my way to start a whole new thread about it...

I mean, I don't like much on the Escapist(No Right Answer being something I'm fairly indifferent to), I don't feel the need to post threads about it. Given that the OPs criticism seems to be trying to be constructive, it seems it would have been better served in an email to the guys who make it?

That argument might hold ground in the case of haters, but that's not what we're seeing here. The OP supplied his opinion about the show's quality supplied the reasons for his dislike and then provided possible solutions to the problems he noticed. That is practically a textbook example of constructive criticism which (generally speaking) anyone worth their salt should actually appreciate. They don't necessarily have to agree with the criticism, but one should always at least consider it as presenting a route to improvement and certainly should never suggest that such criticism should never be voiced. Constructive critisism fosters improvement, which should be more than welcome in any medium.

 

[crazyarms33]

Eh I just see it as a show for laughs, not actual debating. Who cares about who wins? I just want to see how they prove their point .

It's a show for yucks.

Maybe I'm seeing it wrong, but No Right Answer was never meant to be a serious, professional, indepth debate series. It's just two nerdy guys in front of a camera, knocking examples back and forth of why they're right, for a laugh.

Either you laugh at it or you don't.

You! With the common sense! Enough of that! This is a place of rage, hatred and disappointment. Keep your correct observations to yourself!

[sub] PS. I agree with you both[/sub]

 

[Stu35]

That argument might hold ground in the case of haters, but that's not what we're seeing here. The OP supplied his opinion about the show's quality supplied the reasons for his dislike and then provided possible solutions to the problems he noticed. That is practically a textbook example of constructive criticism which (generally speaking) anyone worth their salt should actually appreciate. They don't necessarily have to agree with the criticism, but one should always at least consider it as presenting a route to improvement and certainly should never suggest that such criticism should never be voiced. Constructive critisism fosters improvement, which should be more than welcome in any medium.

I never said constructive criticism was bad. In fact I suggested that, as this is constructive criticism, it might be better served in a direct email to those involved in a show, instead of posted publicly on an internet forum...

Just a thought like, the OP has every right to post their feelings on the matter. I never, at any point said that "such criticism should never be voiced", simply that this might not be the right place for it...

And thats before looking at whether it really was 'textbook' constructive criticism... It might be if the OP was actually running the Escapist or involved in decisions regarding the shows placed on it, as there are quite a few suggestions that might sound appropriate coming from someone in that kind of role, to the best of my knowlege this isn't the case. It's simply an escapist fan whinging that the show does not come up to standards 'they' expect from the escapist and it's videos. Which again, they're entitled to do - but is it really 'constructive criticism' if you're just turning round and saying "I kinda like the idea, but you're not doing it right!"?

I could very easily write a topic about how I feel that my local Rugby League team is running things wrong (and I've written extensively about the subject on my local Rugby League team's fan forum), however if the coach wants to play an open, attacking game, and I want him to play a defensive minded, hard-hitting, stifling game (for example) - Am I offering constructive criticism or am I just a fan with an opinion about how I'd do things?

Are they the same thing? Possibly...

 

[Asita]

I never said constructive criticism was bad. In fact I suggested that, as this is constructive criticism, it might be better served in a direct email to those involved in a show, instead of posted publicly on an internet forum...

Just a thought like, the OP has every right to post their feelings on the matter. I never, at any point said that "such criticism should never be voiced", simply that this might not be the right place for it...

...I don't know how I missed that last line. My apologies, I seem to have developed a bit of a hair-trigger reaction to the sentiment I misread in your post.

 

[loc978]

I've never understood the appeal of the show (their debates confuse the hell out of me... it's like pretending something irrational is rational... and that's funny?), but I figure some people must find it entertaining since it's still up. No need to hate on it, just don't watch it if it's not your thing.

As for bashing their production value... that's a nitpick. A rather tasteless one.

 

[Bobic]

I've never actually made it through an episode, I watched the first episode, to see what it was, and their last episode, to see if it had improved. . . it hadn't.

And here's my main complaint, people have said that the show isn't meant to be taken seriously, fair enough, it's meant to be taken as joke. Now that, I have a problem with. It just feels like 2 random, run of the mill guys, talking about a topic, because that's all it is. If I snuck a camera into my friends (or really, any group of 20 something males, my mates aren't especially funny) house for our usual gatherings and threw in a comment to spark a debate, the results would be just as good, i.e. not something that someone should actually be paying for. If I asked a friend to just randomly review a game in 5 minutes, the result would be nowhere near as good as Yahtzee's offerings. You see my point, it's just amateurish and unnecessary, I don't need to watch two guys of average person humour have a debate, I've got friends of average humour that I could actually talk to myself.

I really don't get the appeal. Maybe if I watched more of it it could grow on me, but why would I continue to watch something that bores me?