Poll: Jim sterling VS Extra credits

[Frostbyte666]

I can't vote on either because I enjoy watching both. though I did hate the Jimquisition when it 1st began it grew on me (plus British WOO!), but it's still not something I'd show to people who aren't already a gamer. Extra Credits however I find good for those new to the industry, hell my dad was fascinated by the music in videogames episode. I'd say that they both bring up good points even if EC has a rose tinted view and Jim goes a touch too far in the arrogant arsehole, which, at points becomes magnificent bastard (Ubisoft episode).

Also does anyone else have problems trying to watch Jim's episode on dynasty warriors?

 

[burningdragoon]

Here's a real shocker folks. Not only do I like both shows, but I also sometimes *gasp* disagree with both. Sometimes when I disagree I can still see the merit of their stance and sometimes I just flat out disagree. I can also see how people might not like the arrogance up to 11 character that Jim puts on (took me a while to warm up to it) or EC's overwhelming optimism (which does put me off sometimes). Maybe I'm just weird like that...

I will say I do prefer the visual gags EC does a lot more than Jim's (purposely) bad drawings and photoshop jobs... though Jim has a hard on for FFIX music so I guess that's a draw as well.

 

[freaper]

Both really.

Jim's commentary is fairly down to earth, and he gives solid answers to everyday problems the industry and specific developers have.

EC deals with broader problems, and their answers are often, if not always, very utopian. People need to understand that not everything they say can be immediately applied, but that the basic idea for a better functioning, and more overt gaming community is already present in their dialogue.

 

[hawkeye52]

I have tried listening to Jim Sterling on 3-4 seperate occasions I think now. Every time it just sounds like he is personally trying to drive nails into my ears. I think the episode that was the worst for me by him was the CoD episode nearer to the beginning of his show which resulted in me typing 1500 word rebuttal I think. Seriously the guy really fucks me off and people like him and present in the manner he does also.

EC on the other hand seem to have things more under control (that's the best way I can describe it) and although they have come off a bit "game are the only way forwards for a better society" sometimes I still prefer them overall by a long margin though not enough for me to bother going to PA.

 

[Vhite]

I think that we need them both, and nothing has convinced me more about variety of opinions than this topic. In fact we need more of them.

 

[Angry Camel]

Overall, I have to go with Jim. Being religious, his God jokes really irritate me sometimes, but he just makes such utterly brilliant points. Not to mention what a nosedive he managed to pull himself out of. I thought he was doomed from the start.

Extra Credits make some really good points as well, but they can be a bit patronising and a bit caught up in artistic issues. I never really watched them too much to have a deep opinion of EC, but they just didn't grab me in the same way. Jim is always taking the piss out of himself, the EC team always seemed a bit oversure of themselves.

Off-topicCaptcha: sonic screw driver. Is it bad the first thing I thought of was Sonic performing Samus' screw attack?)

 

[Something Amyss]

Yes sexism in Xbox live is unacceptable and yes verbal jousting does cross the line, But If we followed the suggestions they say, it would be the death of free speech.

lolwut?

There is no right to free speech on a private service. You can already get banned on these services for hate speech. The issue is, moderation is slow and insufficient.

Where is the line between sexism, racism and bullying and at what point does it leave the realms of hate speech and into just having a different opinion?

Ahh, the slippery slope fallacy.

Jim sterling?s theory of immaturity being a good way to deal with unlikable people is what happens online 60% of the time. Here is an example of how jims logic works.

In the end, you both have the ability to silence each other through the use of mute, and fragging them is always the best option. Every time I hear A racist 12 year old from Indonesia, I (1) mute them (2) frag them (3) unmute them to see if they will act civil now(4) if not mute then warn my teammates, no need to ban anyone just ignore them or If they are to young to be playing the game mock them about there age and how they should ?really get of their mom?s computer? ??.simple

Yes, mocking internet trolls works really well.

Unless you want them to stop.

Seriously, when applied practically, this policy (which is the de facto existing policy) fails.

 

[DoPo]

In my opinion, there isn't really a point in comparing Jim and EC, as they simply don't deal in the same line of work.

I agree with that. I don't think a comparison is needed. Both have their good and bad points. Both have something to say and whether we decide to listen or not isn't going to change it. In fact, I believe some bullshit now and again is better, as I don't like being spoon fed a subject matter. If I can sift through it myself and find a meaning, I think it's better. I actually liked Jim more in the beginning. He absolutely hammered good points among some generic ranting whining and other BS. Saying "I don't agree with Jim because he's a dick" was stupid, as he had valid points. Saying the opposite was also stupid because he made effort to be a dick.

same with Extra Credits but on the other spectrum, I suppose. Take away some puppies and ranbows and you do have valid points. Not always, but the rest are still some things you can learn something from. Be it how not to do it or just a different perspective that might not sound smart.

Of course, none of those two shows is mandatory. Hell, discarding, one or the other or even both could still be a smart choice. Don't like it, don't watch it. None of these are a shining beacon of What Gamerism is About. They are just there in a pool of various other sources anybody can use.

 

[Lectori Salutem]

I like them both to be honest. Both have their good and bad points, like people already mentioned.

 

[Akytalusia]

i like them both, and i also expected backlash from EC's latest episode considering the antagonists to which they refered make up the greater portion of the gaming community. they employ the same social tactics against every social problem they address, and don't seem to realize they need to use much more subtle tactics when addressing issues from a minority position.

 

[TheScottishFella]

In my opinion, there isn't really a point in comparing Jim and EC, as they simply don't deal in the same line of work.

snip

Of course, none of those two shows is mandatory. Hell, discarding, one or the other or even both could still be a smart choice. Don't like it, don't watch it. None of these are a shining beacon of What Gamerism is About. They are just there in a pool of various other sources anybody can use.

But if we don't watch it we wont be able to complain about them D:

In all seriousness they are right. However telling people you don't have to watch them wont make a difference they still feel the need to complain about something that no longer involves them. which is why people who are judging a show that they haven't watched in ages so don't know if they have evolved since the last time they watch should really not even be commenting on this thread. Though that's my opinion.

Did this on my phone will clean it up later.

 

[linwolf]

EC takes opinions, present them as fact and use it to react a badly supported conclusion. As long as that doesn't change I have no interest in them or their show.

Jim is just as opinionated in his arguments, but he doesn't hide it and thereby I don't have to spend time separating the factual from the bullshit.

All in all I like Jim better as even when I disagree I can use his show to look at my own arguments. And I dislike EC as even when I agree I have to spend time else where just to be sure that what they said wasn't at least partly wrong.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

I like them both* And i understand and even agree with some of the reasons people hate both of them but at the same time i don't really think they're comparable, they both do two different types of shows.

EC is generally from a designers perspective, with lots of their material being for people who make or want to make games.

JS is generally from a consumers perspective with most of his material being for consumers of games.

*: just because i like both of their shows doesn't mean i agree with everything they say

 

[DrgoFx]

As much as I like EC, I do have to admit. They seem pretty full of themselves...more than Jim. Jim never outwardly, seriously says that his opinion is the correct and needs to be done. He just states his opinion. And half the time, he has very good opinions. Sometimes, along with EC, I think his opinion is totally out of whack and needs to be checked. But I think Jim puts a bit more thought into his discussions.

 

[spartandude]

I don't dislike Extra Credits, I just think they are kind of inoffensive and preach to the choir too much. Jim's got more bite, and actually calls out the groups that need to be called out.

im gonna agree with this bloke

i also felt as though with the Extra Credits episodes they never left on a conclusion of what to do

 

[Kunzer]

I enjoyed EC when they were here on the escapist.

I've come to realize, though, that they are highly idealistic; Jim tends to be far more realistic.

I haven't watched a single episode since they left The Escapist, therefore I posit that I never found them terribly compelling in the first place.

 

[CatmanStu]

I couldn't vote as I love (and hate) both shows equally.

Extra Credits is a show I enjoy watching for their refreshingly upbeat approach to discussion, with every episode not only looking at the effects of an issue but also trying to find the root cause and at least one constructive solution. (Note I said TRYING; just because you disagree with their solution doesn't negate the fact that they were trying.) The down side is that there is a sense of disconnect that they have with the viewer that can come across as patronising or aloof but I put that down to the politician syndrome. Their scripts are written by James who (if memory serves me correctly) works within the industry and as such has to be very careful what he says publically for fear of effecting his livelyhood in the same way you will never hear a politician say what he really feels. There will always be a certain level of spin.

Jimquisition is a completely different kettle of fish. Jim is on our side of the fence; he's one of us, a gamer. He is also clever enough to realise that WE are his livelyhood and as such he not only tries to reflect our feelings on game related mattters but also listens when we have criticism. The down side to this is that, in the videos at least, Jim has a tendancy to use sensational or one sided arguments as a way of generating debate (or trolling for short). Like Yahtzee, his videos are the desert to the meat and potatoes of his written content.

Both shows have intelligent, insightful, thought provoking moments but both have inevitable flaws drawn from the unique perspectives of the writers.