LogFAQs > #882092969

EnragedSlith posted...

legendarylemur posted...

That's because Jim Sterling talked as if the few flaws were the entire game. I don't think people who praise BotW are ignorant of the flaws of the game. But there are so much more to the game than that, and there are ways around some of the more unwieldy parts of the game.

It's pretty easy to write a bad review about any game honestly, as long as you leave out anything that weakens your points to suit the narrative. And that's what Jim Sterling does whenever he wants to write a controversial review for attention. It's really not just limited to BotW

Or maybe he just wrote what he thought about it because he had nothing to gain or lose from his opinion, even if giving a slightly less than stellar review to a popular game breeds controversy among rabid fans. What I don't think they realize is that most people don't care, so the benefit is marginal. What it does create is an environment where reviewers can't review popular games fairly without being accused of trying to foster attention on themselves, which is an unhealthy outlook.

Except we shouldn't promote faulty reviews either. The point is that he loses absolutely nothing over writing controversial piece. More people he can cajole into his Patreon the better, and more attention the better as well. BotW is only a recent example, but he shat on a LOT of high profile games. It's almost like saying we should let news sites be overly biased and sometimes flat out wrong because freedom of speech and shit like that. But it's their job to be not wrong. When a random guy on the internet says something wrong, I don't care. But Jim Sterling is still a publication.
---

"Iwata was awesome" - Mr. Nintendo
dinglebutt