Poll: Does anyone else feel like "Extra Credits" is full of shit?

[Arkynomicon]

I think they get pretentious from time to time but no harm in analysing a topic unless they use it for something dodgy like propaganda.

Pretty sure it also started out as a motivational show for game developers. For some reason the general public just liked it. Probably because having something that isn't cynic is refreshing. The internet is after all one of the most popular places to condemn something without having to worry about social backlash.

 

[Fishyash]

EC brings up lots of questions... but IMO not enough answers.

It doesn't put me off from watching them. Some episodes I enjoy (the one about Skyrim's intro) and some I find completely wrong (like "perfect imbalance").

Also, in regards to Loneliness, it isn't a game. Even if the person who made it didn't call it a "notgame", it really isn't a game, it doesn't fit the criteria to be a game of any sort. It actually kind of annoyed me when EC kept calling it a game.

In regards to mechanics as metaphor, I would have personally looked to castlevania (sequelitis is way better than extra credits IMO)

 

[Petromir]

I despise them. They point out the obvious and act like it is some magical breakthrough. I'm sure they are all nice people but to me they will always be pretencious, self righteous jerks and petty theives.

"Petty thieves"? I don't understand. Did they plagiarize someone?

Their artist broke her wrist so they ran a fundraising thing. They quickly got the money and then used to run off money to fund a company, so they mislead the audience of the fundraiser and used the money for something that was not mentioned.

A gross misrepresentation of the chain of events.

They were foolish not to have a contigency plan for what to do if the total raised noticibly exceeded the target. However there is no evidence to suggested they beleived this was likely or that the amount that they exceeded it by was likely to be an issue.

They also I recall offered to refund those who disliked their plans for the excess money.

To substatiate a accusation of theft in this case you have to prove intent to mislead, (a requirement of theft techincally also requires that you be intending not to return it) to do that you would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they inteded for it to go over.

Fairly sure the amounts involved discount petty as well, as that well suggestets a small amount.

 

[Hjalmar Fryklund]

Well, I watched a couple of their episodes when they were on here. I thought they had some interesting points here and there, but I found that the show just wasn't up my street. I have a difficult time rationalising why though.

huh?...hey you!

whats your opinion on Capcom, ubisoft and the Wii!?...tell me dammit!

Huh?

...oh, I remember now.

I see what you did there!

 

[Awexsome]

IMO the pretentious label people place on them as an insult is just people who don't agree, but in their need to hate they attach that label to something intelligent they don't like. And that there is giving them the benefit of the doubt. There's also a lot of people who really just can't understand it and therefore find some way to hate on it.

 

[II2]

James may be pretentious at times, and his taste certainly differs from mine... but he understands bits of human nature that I don't even have any fucking sympathy for. Academically, what they cover is often pretty interesting to me.

I tend to respect your point of view in your posts, I was wondering if you could expand on that statement, since I'm not sure I follow, but I'm curious.

---

On the topic of EC in general, I think their present incarnation is kinda the product of flash in the pan success. They burned through a lot of best topics quickly and then have progressively been reaching around the bottom of the barrel to find new issues to shed light on to meet a weekly quota.

As far as their format, it's academic and , but I don't think they've ever sold themselves as anything other than a free lecture series. If you're ok with that, as a viewer, they have some worthwhile stuff to say, but can get entangled with the evangelical and idealistic "we can change the world" vibe. So, grain of salt...

 

[Richard Keohane]

They also don't seem to offer any criticism either, rather than just glossing over That Game Company, they should pick apart their games and discuss what doesn't work just as much what does. WHAT concepts were presented and HOW they were explored in Flower, Flow, and Journey? Were these concepts successfully executed? Why not? How could they've been?
And I really hate to say it, but that's kinda why I like Yahtzee, he'll go into the details (like in his Silent Hill 2 review) and really explain why what works and how, and what doesn't and why. After the end of every Extra Credits episode I have the same "....so what do you expect to DO about it?" feeling.

You have to remember that Extra Creditz comes from people INSIDE the industry talking, while Zero Punctuation comes from a gamer who is on the very fringe of the industry. Their perspectives are different, and I suspect that you can relate to the experiences of Yahtzee more easily since you are both gamers and have shared experiences.

That said, I LOVE hearing about this perspective that I've never been able to experience, because I find it informative, interesting, and new. I find Extra Creditz to be incredibly insightful, but if you don't like the way they do their show, write them! They do read their fan mail, and if you think you live up to your own advice, offer them specific points on what they can do to improve.

 

[frizzlebyte]

So basically the same thing Jim Sterling does... but Jim makes the tone over the top and part of his shtick. That makes it comedy, and pretty funny stuff. EC just does it so un-ironically; we actually have to wonder if they realize they aren't very insightful.

This. The first few times I watched their vids, they seemed to bring up some interesting points. After a few more, I haven't checked them out since. Jim Sterling, on the other hand, is hilarious. And his latest video on boycotts was epic. Agreed with everything he said, really.

Yeah...what the game industry needs is more nerds writing blogs about how DLCs are shit.

Glad we agree.

 

[Alex Mac]

However in Loneliness there was no such projection of context, nor was there any asked of you. You can understand immediately from the title and gameplay how it's "lonely" so it's not needed.

I can tell you that this is not true, if only from my own experience. Certain moments of that "notgame" meant specific things to me, based entirely off of my own real world experiences being projected on the canvas of the game. There are moments in that game where, for instance, I know who each dot is. If you like, I can provide examples.

The title, music, and visual aesthetics contextualize the theme and express the tone the designer wants to get across. But I can tell you flat on that there were moments in there that I'm 100% sure symbolized something to me that was much different than what the auteur intended. And the mechanics reinforced those projections.

 

[viranimus]

I think ECs failing centers around the fact that they are idealists. Much like most idealists, they look to how things should be, and not to the practicality of how they are which usually results in failure. Much like the EC indie fund. It is good in theory, its a great idea (one that has actually been done sucessfully no less) but when put into the hands of idealists it puttered into nothing and then promptly faded into memory.

We need idealists and dreamers. They keep our desire pure. But idealists can never rule the world.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Absolutely not.

They can be a bit pretentious sometimes, sure.

They don't have a huge amount of substance, just speculation, but what can you really expect from a once a week under ten minute show?

And I'm a special case, but the assumptions they make are almost always correct for me.
Loneliness perfectly represented when I feel especially alone.

Finally, I really respect and agree with they're constant theme that games can be SO much more than they are now and this may seem like an asshole thing to say, but anyone who says something like "They're just games! Stop trying to make everything so serious!" needs to seriously reevaluate things.

 

[azukar]

I thought they were a bit wanky when they first started, to be honest.

If they're furthering the kind of discussion that leads to more really cool games for me to play, then that's fine by me.

 

[Blarkuntvhite]

This may be a cheap shot, but I was a little turned off Extra Credits because the guy's voice sounded electronically pitched up.

It's a really noticeable effect, and I don't understand why you'd do it unless you're attempting to emulate the success of a... certain YouTube celebrity whose name will go unmentioned... or you're talking to a child and want to sound like Mickey Mouse.

 

[loc978]

James may be pretentious at times, and his taste certainly differs from mine... but he understands bits of human nature that I don't even have any fucking sympathy for. Academically, what they cover is often pretty interesting to me.

I tend to respect your point of view in your posts, I was wondering if you could expand on that statement, since I'm not sure I follow, but I'm curious.

The first thing that popped to mind was the extreme Skinner Box thing that so many MMOs implement... I seem incapable of understanding the draw of incredibly slow reward systems. I'm either gaming for a narrative or a performance challenge (or teamwork... which is just a collaborative performance challenge). Every time someone starts gushing about loot in any game, my eyes glass over.

Looking over their episode list, I also see horror games (which I sometimes view as a performance challenge in terms of resource conservation... but that's the only draw for me)... and that's all I've got from scanning titles. Honestly, I'd need to rewatch a lot of it to figure out where this general feeling of mine comes from, but I'm sure it's there for more reasons than just those.