Yahtzee's Opinion

[A.A.K]

I dare not bad mouth him as i love the stuff he does, and i am well aware that in his game reviews, some of the stuff he says is just for humour and that even he is aware that its more interesting and humorous when you just talk shit about the game but have you ever found a game where everything he has said in a review was true?

I made the fatal mistake of believing he was exaggerating the Sonic Unleashed Review but i must say that everything he said was exactly how it was....

any of your stories?

 

[WrongSprite]

He doesn't just make shit up =P Most of what he says is based in truth, even if it's exaggerated.

 

[Vrex360]

I disaprove of how he bashes Halo 3 without giving any credible reason, the story seemed basic to him as he did not play the backstory, the gameplay was average only because he didn't realise that the first Halo revolutionised the formula, and because he only played one part of it he has no right to complain about how the game had 'so little'

That said I find the man to be very funny and I respect him.

 

[Overlord Moo]

He doesn't just make shit up =P Most of what he says is based in truth, even if it's exaggerated.

What he said.

 

[nixubaby]

Saitns Row 2 was pretty much as sweet as yahtzee said. But I gues it doesn´t count because he said that you´d get bored with the minigames and that never happened to me.

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

Saitns Row was pretty much as sweet as yahtzee said. But I gues it doesn´t count because he said that you´d get bored with the minigames and that never happened to me.

I agree with you there...the minigames are veerry fun, especially breaking yourself to get money.

 

[mikecoulter]

Please, stop making Yahtzee threads, like someone recently said, you're preaching to the converted. Talk about him on other sites, it will bring more people here.

 

[blackcherry]

He is payed to badmouth games. You can see from the popularity of certain reviews, that when he injects actual real venom into his comments on games then the viewing figures are a lot higher than say, if he praises a game.

As such, well hes taken to bad mouthing everything in sight regardless of likes or dislikes, which is showing. Meanwhile he invests the paycheck elsewhere.

Of course, this is my opinion alone. Please don't be offended.

 

[crudus]

I have played a few of the games he has review (some games before I saw he review, some after) and I can say I agree with most of what he says. I have (almost) never found that he makes shit up. If he exaggerates it is very little or making a simile.

 

[loremazd]

I only disagreed with him on Mirror's edge. That was a fun game, flawed, but not the terrible game he painted.

 

[Khazoth]

It depends on how pessimistic and cynical you are, I suppose. I agree with him for the most part but there are quite a few times i've disagreed with him.

I liked Mirrors Edge.

AND I HATED PSYCHONAUTS, YEAH, EAT THAT.

 

[IrrelevantTangent]

I don't really take him THAT seriously, but his reviews are still fun to watch nonetheless. And Dead Space was pretty good despite him badmouthing it as repetitive, repetitive, and repetitive.

 

[Danarok]

I disaprove of how he bashes Halo 3 without giving any credible reason,

Not wanting or usurp the topic too much, lets have a look at this.

the story seemed basic to him as he did not play the backstory,

Should he have to? Is he wrong to expect a game to have a plot that is able to stand on its own two feet?

the gameplay was average only because he didn't realise that the first Halo revolutionised the formula,

So you're saying Bungie "revolutionised" the formula to have average gameplay. I don't understand; surely average is still average, even if you get there first.

and because he only played one part of it he has no right to complain about how the game had 'so little'

I would hazard a guess and suggest that he is refering to 'so little' in terms of variety. From what I can remember, its pretty much all 'run and gun', with a few vehicle sections to break things up. The variety of locations is pretty varied, but gameplay? I don't want to get too deep here or the fanboys will come hunting for blood, but I can see why someone with a cynical point of view could see it as pretty shallow.


EDIT: And Indigo_Dingo gets there first by 1 minute

 

[Captain Blackout]

While I find his criticism usually right, he does seem to take it too far at times.

As Gilbert Godfried once said, "We're comedians. We're supposed to take it too far."

I don't have time or money to waste on crappy games. I really appreciate his comments regarding how he doesn't do well with some kinds of games (i.e. fighting games) since it puts everything he has to say in perspective. His biting sarcastic reviews have saved me both time and money and that's about the best a reviewer can do for an audience. Plus, he's probably a comedian first and reviewer second so it doesn't hurt that he's usually funny as hell.

 

[justnotcricket]

I think he summed up Prince of Persia (the new one) very well indeed. =) And Zelda, Phantom Hourglass. Everyone got very excited about that game, but I coudldn't stand the pointless repetition of the stealth dungeon sections...Yahtzee was right on the money with that one...

 

[Sgt Doom]

Though he does exaggerate, he doesn't fabricate, is what i've found. The Bioshock and STALKER: Clear Sky reviews are ones I agreed with particularly.

 

[JemJar]

He is payed to badmouth games. You can see from the popularity of certain reviews, that when he injects actual real venom into his comments on games then the viewing figures are a lot higher than say, if he praises a game.

As such, well hes taken to bad mouthing everything in sight regardless of likes or dislikes, which is showing. Meanwhile he invests the paycheck elsewhere.

Of course, this is my opinion alone. Please don't be offended.

He gets his best ratings on bad-mouthing games which have received widespread good reviews and yet are not enjoyed by gamers that much - Biosh*$k and GTA4 for example.