Review: Zero Punctuation

[ultimatechance]

He has said it himself, that making fun of a game is not nearly as entertaining as him praising it...

Think you got that one a bit backwards.Still some good points though. Pretty accurate review of the series.
I personally love Yahtzee's reviews, but I wouldn't take them as actual advice. The things he points out are generally true, and I can look back on a game and see those flaws, but they generally aren't things that I would actually criticize a game for, but are still things that I will laugh at when they are pointed out.

lol thanks, i fixed that up.

 

[_Serendipity_]

One reason I like Yahtzee is the fact that he usually states that when he doesn't like a game, it's his own opinion. When he rips on JRPGs, he usually mentions that many of the things he hates will probably be selling points for genre fans.

Pretty good review though.

 

[Yuriatayde]

(snip) And yes, I know that some people just don't like certain games, but the reviewer should at least give it a fair chance, and not say things like throwing your controller down a bunch of stairs is the best way to win. (snip)

I'm not entirely convinced that you know what you're talking about when you say that all he does is bash on the games... I really don't understand where people get the idea that all he does is nit pick, I think they expect it, and therefor take what he says out of context. This quote for example: Try joining a smash bros tournament and you'll instantly realize what he means. When four people are all only trying to win, it becomes a smash fest where skill means less then luck.

The point to listen for is that he's giving a first-impressions hands-on, he spits out misc details that somebody considering the game might like to know. In most cases, at least for me, I very much like to hear of the flaws so that I can know if any of them would be game breaking for me. Other points of interest are usually glossed over by his critics, like how little of his review is actually bashing. He tries to go for fact, and fact of the matter is that most of the games he reviews tend to have glaring problems in design.

I dunno, maybe it just seems to me like you think he should be GameSpot sans the bribery. No opinions allowed, just talk about what's in the game. Another useless reviewer that won't tell me anything. He isn't so deep that I couldn't catch on when I first discovered ZP, either, it's obvious; he isn't trying to sell you anything, he's just chatting about what he got from it, and very rarely does he seem to exaggerate. So he didn't like SSBB. If he didn't like it, does that really make you think that you won't/shouldn't? If yes, I have some bad news for you...

[edit; 2nd paragraph was mostly re-written]

 

[ultimatechance]

(snip) And yes, I know that some people just don't like certain games, but the reviewer should at least give it a fair chance, and not say things like throwing your controller down a bunch of stairs is the best way to win. (snip)

I'm not entirely convinced that you know what you're talking about when you say that all he does is bash on the games... I really don't understand where people get the idea that all he does is nit pick, I think they expect it, and therefor take what he says out of context. This quote for example: Try joining a smash bros tournament and you'll instantly realize what he means. When four people are all only trying to win, it becomes a smash fest where skill means less then luck.

The point to listen for is that he's giving a first-impressions hands-on, he spits out misc details that somebody considering the game might like to know. In most cases, at least for me, I very much like to hear of the flaws so that I can know if any of them would be game breaking for me. Other points of interest are usually glossed over by his critics, like how little of his review is actually bashing. He tries to go for fact, and fact of the matter is that most of the games he reviews tend to have glaring problems in design.

I dunno, maybe it just seems to me like you think he should be GameSpot sans the bribery. No opinions allowed, just talk about what's in the game. Another useless reviewer that won't tell me anything. He isn't so deep that I couldn't catch on when I first discovered ZP, either, it's obvious; he isn't trying to sell you anything, he's just chatting about what he got from it, and very rarely does he seem to exaggerate. So he didn't like SSBB. If he didn't like it, does that really make you think that you won't/shouldn't? If yes, I have some bad news for you...

[edit; 2nd paragraph was mostly re-written]

What are you trying to say? Im having trouble getting your message. First youre defending yahtzee that he doesnt just bash games, then youre saying that you want to hear the flaws, then youre saying I think i want him to be like a mainstream reviewer?

Yahtzee is well known for ranting, and being an overly critical critic. Take the minute to watch the Bioshock review. He says it himself that Bioshock is one of the best games of the year, and compliments it for the first 10 seconds. Why doesnt he go into detail about it? Because its obviously harder to make jokes. If you watch ZP for a properly detailed opinion on the game, then youve picked the wrong series.

And yes.... I know its his first impressions. Thats why its VERY opinion based, and not detailed. You also are misinterpresting what im saying, because the sentence i just said isnt a bad thing at all. In Yahtzees case, being very opinion based, laid-back/unprofessional, and not overly detailed is what makes ZP what it is. Its funny, and it makes fun of the games that people love. He purposely either leaves out, or cuts short the parts of him complimenting the game, so he can make room to make fun of it. And also, do you know why people watch/read reviews? If a person watches a review that praises or rips on a game, then it can sway his decision to play the game. Thats the whole purpose for reviews in the first place. In ZP's case, its not the conventional review. So to answer you question, if i look forward to a game, and several critics think that its bad, ill probably wait to get it, or simply rent it. Yahtzee specifically? I watch his videos just to laugh, so i dont know what youre getting at.

Im sorry, but what the fuck? I clearly say at the end in the form of a stand alone sentence that i dont want Yahtzee to change, as ZP is great the way it is. How did it possibly go through your head that I wanted him to be like the average mainstream reviewer?

 

[A.I. Sigma]

Great review! You should do more of them.

 

[Flap Jack452]

review of a semi-review show... nice

 

[Flap Jack452]

Keep doing your thing Yahtzee, Zero Punctuation is great the way it is.

I subscribe to your youtube channel and enjoy the whity show reviews that you do.

 

[darthzew]

I actually find his reviews to be a very different perspective from the norm, which is great. He never loses sight that a game is supposed to be fun and not merely technically good. I find this perspective fresh and often correct.

I disagree in parts with your review, but it was well-written and well-done. Props.

 

[ultimatechance]

Keep doing your thing Yahtzee, Zero Punctuation is great the way it is.

I subscribe to your youtube channel and enjoy the whity show reviews that you do.

Well thats actually not me, but its cool that you like them. I did reviews before, but i took them down to make room for his videos, although my older videos are still there (non reviews)

 

[Yuriatayde]

What are you trying to say? Im having trouble getting your message. First youre defending yahtzee that he doesnt just bash games, then youre saying that you want to hear the flaws, then youre saying I think i want him to be like a mainstream reviewer? (keeping it short via snipping)

No, sounds like you understood me okay. He's a critic, he critiques, no, he doesn't *just* bash, but I like the bashing anyway because it's not the run of the mill "this game does this this and this" that you get everywhere else. What I was trying to get at, was that I see him as a credible reviewer, because he doesn't lie, and he focuses on things that actually matter... unlike other review sites. People say that all he does is bash, and I just don't see that.

*re-watches Bioshock review* Tossing aside that he says outright "you asked for it, here's some overcriticalness for you", most of his 'critique' is as it always is... he's talking about the game, and making fun of it whenever it's convenient. The only bashing I noticed was that it was nothing new ("borrowed" from other games) the good/evil thing is, as always, way too two-sided, and it was too easy. It otherwise wasn't much of a bashfest save for his tone of voice.

I really just don't agree with you that he isn't professional, or that he's vague and opinionated. Take L4D for example; I used his review while I was considering buying that, and after getting it, turns out he gave me an incredibly accurate idea of what to expect. He didn't say everything about the game, but everywhere else told me that stuff. Perhaps it's just a case of hearing what he's saying, and paying less mind to how he's saying it.

 

[theSovietConnection]

I even followed him before he went to Escapist and most of things he says remind me of a Mitch Hedberg if he was a game critic.

Nice to see another Mitch Hedberg fan!

Back on topic, this was a well thought out review, better then anything I'd have been able to come up with, at any rate.

If you listen to his videos to the way he interprets them, you might be missing out on some games YOU MIGHT LIKE, so dont be a mindless idiot.

That sentence sums up what I think should be the most widely dispersed part of your review. A friend of mine I introduced to Yahtzee's reviews treats his words as absolute gold, and even though I'm fairly certain he would actually like Mirror's Edge, he will not play it "because Yahtzee didn't like it"

 

[ultimatechance]

What are you trying to say? Im having trouble getting your message. First youre defending yahtzee that he doesnt just bash games, then youre saying that you want to hear the flaws, then youre saying I think i want him to be like a mainstream reviewer? (keeping it short via snipping)

No, sounds like you understood me okay. He's a critic, he critiques, no, he doesn't *just* bash, but I like the bashing anyway because it's not the run of the mill "this game does this this and this" that you get everywhere else. What I was trying to get at, was that I see him as a credible reviewer, because he doesn't lie, and he focuses on things that actually matter... unlike other review sites. People say that all he does is bash, and I just don't see that.

*re-watches Bioshock review* Tossing aside that he says outright "you asked for it, here's some overcriticalness for you", most of his 'critique' is as it always is... he's talking about the game, and making fun of it whenever it's convenient. The only bashing I noticed was that it was nothing new ("borrowed" from other games) the good/evil thing is, as always, way too two-sided, and it was too easy. It otherwise wasn't much of a bashfest save for his tone of voice.

I really just don't agree with you that he isn't professional, or that he's vague and opinionated. Take L4D for example; I used his review while I was considering buying that, and after getting it, turns out he gave me an incredibly accurate idea of what to expect. He didn't say everything about the game, but everywhere else told me that stuff. Perhaps it's just a case of hearing what he's saying, and paying less mind to how he's saying it.

you are simply nit picking on my word choice now. When I said "bashing", it was simply bringing variety to the word "criticizes". When you "bash" on a game, is that not when you give a harsh critique on it? Bash is a more harsh word than criticizes, but its still generally the same thing. If you dont think it is, then fine, its just a word. When a reviewer says that he's done with the good in the first 10 seconds, then says lets go onto its "shitiness", then that's obviously how hes going to review it. Theres no denying that his goal is to criticize more than he can praise. Hence why you only see a few episodes where hes short for words to criticize on, like Portal.

As for professional, did you not see how i said that its not a bad thing? Like what are you trying to get at? You say that you dont want him to be like a regular reviewer, which acts professionally, avoids joking, doesnt swear, and cant make their own drawings involving dicks and tits. Then you have someone who can do whatever the hell he wants, and does it his own way, laid-back, unrestricted, and uncensored. Uprofessional? Yes. Damages the quality of a good ZP Episode? Of course not, because thats how ZP episodes are. Well-produced isnt the same as professionalism in the context that im using it in.

 

[KeyMaster45]

To be out right honest I didn't have the attention span to read the original post, but from the opening paragraph, and half of the last I can safley assume it wasn't a "bash Yahtzee" post.

You're right, to take ZP as a serious review would be rather shortsighted of someone. Naturally every game has its flaws, for instance the art direction of Lara in the latest tomb raider, and though ZP points out some of the more obvious flaws I find it fun to have either played the game and be able to laugh along with my friends when someone poetically makes fun of them, or to some time later purchase the game and share in the experience of what's wrong with it.

Its a fun review show to watch, and definatley brings out a chuckle or two for me when I get stuck in a game due to bad design.

 

[ultimatechance]

To be out right honest I didn't have the attention span to read the original post, but from the opening paragraph, and half of the last I can safley assume it wasn't a "bash Yahtzee" post.

You're right, to take ZP as a serious review would be rather shortsighted of someone. Naturally every game has its flaws, for instance the art direction of Lara in the latest tomb raider, and though ZP points out some of the more obvious flaws I find it fun to have either played the game and be able to laugh along with my friends when someone poetically makes fun of them, or to some time later purchase the game and share in the experience of what's wrong with it.

Its a fun review show to watch, and definatley brings out a chuckle or two for me when I get stuck in a game due to bad design.

lol, shouldnt a "praise Yahtzee" post be more expected here?

 

[LiL'Tic]

i agree, zero punctuation is funny, but not always accurate, and you have to take what he says with a grain of salt

 

[Calax]

No, sounds like you understood me okay. He's a critic, he critiques, no, he doesn't *just* bash, but I like the bashing anyway because it's not the run of the mill "this game does this this and this" that you get everywhere else. What I was trying to get at, was that I see him as a credible reviewer, because he doesn't lie, and he focuses on things that actually matter... unlike other review sites. People say that all he does is bash, and I just don't see that.

*re-watches Bioshock review* Tossing aside that he says outright "you asked for it, here's some overcriticalness for you", most of his 'critique' is as it always is... he's talking about the game, and making fun of it whenever it's convenient. The only bashing I noticed was that it was nothing new ("borrowed" from other games) the good/evil thing is, as always, way too two-sided, and it was too easy. It otherwise wasn't much of a bashfest save for his tone of voice.

I really just don't agree with you that he isn't professional, or that he's vague and opinionated. Take L4D for example; I used his review while I was considering buying that, and after getting it, turns out he gave me an incredibly accurate idea of what to expect. He didn't say everything about the game, but everywhere else told me that stuff. Perhaps it's just a case of hearing what he's saying, and paying less mind to how he's saying it.

The difference between a reviewer and Yahtzee is that a professional review will also point out the things that were done well. Yahtzee tried to do this early on but people didn't like it so he decided to just go on about how bad the games are. In a weird sort of way you can tell when he likes a game based upon how much reviewing is actually done in the review. The number of topics about the game that he bashes is inversely proportional to how much he likes the game. The more topics he bashes the less he likes it.

That said, Yahtzee is most defiantly not a reviewer. Critic? Yes, but a review, in my mind at least, at least requires the reviewer to acknowledge the good points of a game rather than just bash it's head in with bad game design, or plot flaws, or what have you. I would think that if a development house were to watch Yahtzee's reviews and base a game upon them the game would ultimately flop because while it was a good game for Yahtzee, the rest of us would find it to out there to play.

If you're looking for a reason to HATE a game, turn to Yahtzee. But if you're looking for a reason to purchase a game, try game informer or a review on gamefaqs (actually try a sampling of gamefaqs reviews, because those suckers can be pretty bias) or here. Basically if you're looking for a reason to buy a game go to a place where the reviewers are either paid to put out a good product, or feel that the game was so good/bad that they just HAD to air their qualms about it on a more public forum.

 

[Valiance]

Very elaborate and well-written review. I agree with most of it, and it was a pleasure to read - since I feel pretty much the same way. I'm surprised Yahtzee is still at it, to be honest. It seems like he's lost a bit of his edge, but I still enjoy his reviews. I don't think I've ever watched one that I thought just sucked, but some are definitely more entertaining than others.

Although I first heard of the escapist from his videos, I actually joined for the Planetside War (which I finally got a key for since someone never PM'd them back, and I can't wait to get home and install it).

Even though he's still good, I believe that the Escapist has other great media from talented people (Unskippable, Unforgotten Realms, the news columns, user reviews, etc.)

To be honest, I'm glad that when someone showed me his fallout 3 review that I bothered watching all of them (eventually, since I heard or played most of the games he reviews), and that I eventually came to find more things on the site that I wouldn't have discovered were it not for an immature friend of a friend like "ths dude so fnuy lol he shud do *game he hates* cuz itd be mad funy, ima give him sugestiosn" , (You know, the kind who make me feel ashamed being part of the human race).

TL;DR:

Nice review.
ZP is still good.
People need to not take him so seriously.
People need to appreciate other things on the site than ZP.

 

[Nerdfury]

I'm not sure anyone (except idiots) have ever called ZP anything but entertainment. Anyone who thinks that he's honestly doing a genuine review and not just providing entertainment is not very intelligent.

 

[Beacon]

I've never taken ZP as a serious review. I just watch it to laugh...but I can't deny that it has helped me pick out games and I agree with the vast majority of what he says.

Because of ZP, I bought Force Unleashed for the 360 instead of the Wii like I was going to.
I did start to hate Condemned 2 after a while because of the plot.
LBP is pointless
Sonic is dead
Halo 3 was overrated.

I think the only thing that I steadfastly disagree with Yahtzee is that I think Guitar Hero 3 is the best in the series.