When I'm talked down to practically every EC episode like I'm a fucking 5 year old? Yes, the open hostility is warranted. Jim does it for the rise it gets out of people. The EC crew are just pretentious.Waffle_Man said:
Poll: Jim sterling VS Extra credits
- Thread starter James Ennever
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Fair enough. I don't know enough about the debacle to debate one way or the other, but it is nice to have a reason beyond "screw those guys!"James Ennever said:
It hardly seems fair to judge a show that was trying to make issues understandable to someone who wasn't necessarily acquainted with them. Aside from this, can you tell me any actual examples of them being pretentious? It is a subjective term, but I having trouble thinking of any moments that would fit any definition that I know of.wintercoat said:
I've not watched the episodes in question, but in general I think that EC stands up better when put under a PROMPT analysis. Note that this is not about how entertaining they are, but each shows reliability.
Presentation: E.C use an even and easily understood tone to convey their message while Jim rants and slurs a lot, sacrificing clarity for a sense of personal voice.
Relevance: They both produce material about games. /shrug
Objectivity: While both have a bias, I think that E.Cs is the more open and honest here, although they want gaming to be considered a serious medium and as such they present their facts with some grandosity. They also tend to sugercoat negitive arguments, but at least they present them in some form or another. Jim on the other hand I feel is a little corrupt. I belive that his agenda is for sale to a certain degree as he often plugs individual games. This makes me question whether or not his opinions are his own or created for page views or regulated by his producer.
Method: E.C have a definate academic approach to what they produce. Jim seems to have no real method beyond opinion which is impossible to argue with or quantify.
Provenance: E.C show sources and they are open with the fact that they are industry professionals first, journalist second. Jim does neither of these but again it comes down to the fact that he produces opinion pieces. He is his own source and he has no apparent qualities that elevate this.
Timeliness: Since they both produce articles on a regular basis they can both be considered timely.
Presentation: E.C use an even and easily understood tone to convey their message while Jim rants and slurs a lot, sacrificing clarity for a sense of personal voice.
Relevance: They both produce material about games. /shrug
Objectivity: While both have a bias, I think that E.Cs is the more open and honest here, although they want gaming to be considered a serious medium and as such they present their facts with some grandosity. They also tend to sugercoat negitive arguments, but at least they present them in some form or another. Jim on the other hand I feel is a little corrupt. I belive that his agenda is for sale to a certain degree as he often plugs individual games. This makes me question whether or not his opinions are his own or created for page views or regulated by his producer.
Method: E.C have a definate academic approach to what they produce. Jim seems to have no real method beyond opinion which is impossible to argue with or quantify.
Provenance: E.C show sources and they are open with the fact that they are industry professionals first, journalist second. Jim does neither of these but again it comes down to the fact that he produces opinion pieces. He is his own source and he has no apparent qualities that elevate this.
Timeliness: Since they both produce articles on a regular basis they can both be considered timely.
Biased opinion incoming.
I disliked EC when they were here and I still dislike them now.
Jim is British therefore I instantly like him .... plus he makes me giggle.
I can't honestly think of one good thing to say about the EC lot so i'm not even going to attempt it.
As such I didn't watch said episode so will just have to go with Jim's idea.
I disliked EC when they were here and I still dislike them now.
Jim is British therefore I instantly like him .... plus he makes me giggle.
I can't honestly think of one good thing to say about the EC lot so i'm not even going to attempt it.
As such I didn't watch said episode so will just have to go with Jim's idea.
Jim is opinionated, prepared to get worked up into a very welcome nerd rage, and funny. He knows and is comfortable with the persona and while I don't agree with him on everything, that isn't totally his point. He doesn't come across as genuinely believing he's right about everything, though he'll joke that he is. Thank God for Jim.
EC speak down and talk as if they are the fountain of truth on the matter. Also, they are wrong. Their section on investors and finance made me want to punch them in the mouth because every word they said was complete fabricated bullshit that even the smallest amount of research would show. So basically I don't give a crap. I've watched maybe just 1 or 2 in the last year, and those were utter rubbish, so whatever.
Again, thank God for Jim.
EC speak down and talk as if they are the fountain of truth on the matter. Also, they are wrong. Their section on investors and finance made me want to punch them in the mouth because every word they said was complete fabricated bullshit that even the smallest amount of research would show. So basically I don't give a crap. I've watched maybe just 1 or 2 in the last year, and those were utter rubbish, so whatever.
Again, thank God for Jim.
Wow. When did everyone start saying the EC was pretentious? I swear, this did not exist when they were still here. Connection? You decide!
OT: I like both. Jim, for his more opinionated take on things. EC, for their more academic approach to things. When I watch a Jim video, I feel like I just watched a well constructed rant. When I watch an EC video, I feel like I just watched a well constructed short lecture/opinion piece. Different stokes, I guess. :/ But then again, I don't have an insane hostility to apposing views that many have. I fact, I rather like hearing another person's take on something. So... take from that what you will.
OT: I like both. Jim, for his more opinionated take on things. EC, for their more academic approach to things. When I watch a Jim video, I feel like I just watched a well constructed rant. When I watch an EC video, I feel like I just watched a well constructed short lecture/opinion piece. Different stokes, I guess. :/ But then again, I don't have an insane hostility to apposing views that many have. I fact, I rather like hearing another person's take on something. So... take from that what you will.
Yes they did then he listened and changed his show.Elamdri said:
Actually there was quite a bit of people that didn't like them when they were here for many of the same reasons listed here. I remember seeing the "talking down to" posts quite a bit.BreakfastMan said:
You must have been looking in different places than me then. I saw those posts then about as often as I see "Jim teh sux0r" posts now. :/80Maxwell08 said:
He improved, honestly. He got much, much better the longer he went on. He learned how to better write his character, he learned how to better present his opinions, the whole she-bang.Elamdri said:
dangit i was ninjaed before i even opened the thread.5ilver said:
Ok, someone needs to tell me what went down where the EC people left this fine site, because im confused as hell.
Well, as someone who loves the show, that is quite needlessly insulting. "Oh no, people enjoy something I do not! Better make massive, offensive generalizations about them! That will certainly get me and my point taken seriously!"SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
Except for the fact that Jim is an actual games journalist. And James is a professional game designer.
