Board 8 > Jim Sterling's website is back up after getting DDoS'd for his Zelda review

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://www.thejimquisition.com/the-legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-review/

Dropped it down to 97 and off the #1 spot on Metacritic

the salt is real
---

Someone said he gave Hyrule Warriors a 9.5
---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

Someone said he gave Hyrule Warriors a 9.5

There's nothing wrong with that. People who compare review scores between games are silly. That's not how reviews work.
---

The review seems fair to me. I don't have much of an issue with the annoyances he outlined, but I think most of them are definitely problems with the game.
---

The MOST silly thing is caring about Metacritic
---

The Mana Sword posted...

The review seems fair to me. I don't have much of an issue with the annoyances he outlined, but I think most of them are definitely problems with the game.

This is kind of my thought. Like, the game isn't perfect, but the things that annoy him just don't bug me as much.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

The MOST silly thing is caring about Metacritic

you don't understand, this was supposed to be the greatest game OF ALL TIME
---

digiiiiiiiii posted...

There's nothing wrong with that. People who compare review scores between games are silly. That's not how reviews work.

Yeah but it suggests that he just has entirely different preferences than me since that's a type of game I could never get into.
---

DDoS? What's that mean?
---

it's nice to see that after a decade of branching out and making harassment big business, gamers still have time to harass people over a zelda score
---

Finally I can stop copy/pasting my giant post about complaints about the game and just use this.... thanks Jim!

Although he praises the art direction too much, I think the weird cel-shading + low res textures combo is terrible. Everything else is scarily exact to my thoughts though, down to the 7/10.
---

A little bit Tri-forced.

This man deserves everything he gets for this stupid joke. jk
---

iiicon posted...

it's nice to see that after a decade of branching out and making harassment big business, gamers still have time to harass people over a zelda score

I know, it's so nostalgic for a simpler time!
---

Jakyl25 posted...

The MOST silly thing is caring about Metacritic

I'd say attacking someone's site that don't generate any ad revenue or profit from is even sillier. Like, congrats, now Jim will be cursed with free publicity and some easy content to joke about.

Even sillier yet is doing this when Jim ultimately liked the game and just had some concerns with it, but gets attacked harder than some of the fans of games he actually disliked.
---

Has anyone seen MWC lately? I'm a little concerned.
---

Damn ZJW's
---

foolm0r0n posted...

Finally I can stop copy/pasting my giant post about complaints about the game and just use this.... thanks Jim!

Although he praises the art direction too much, I think the weird cel-shading + low res textures combo is terrible. Everything else is scarily exact to my thoughts though, down to the 7/10.

Yeah, my issues with the game are the same as Jim's. Though, like him, I like the art style a lot. The thing is, the issues I have with the game are like ... easily patchable. Nintendo won't do it, of course. But the inventory stuff and other issues I have are so easily fixable.
---

inb4 vlado
---

digiiiiiiiii posted...

The thing is, the issues I have with the game are like ... easily patchable. Nintendo won't do it, of course. But the inventory stuff and other issues I have are so easily fixable.

Do you dislike the weapon breaking in general, or is it something more specific?
---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

digiiiiiiiii posted...

The thing is, the issues I have with the game are like ... easily patchable. Nintendo won't do it, of course. But the inventory stuff and other issues I have are so easily fixable.

Do you dislike the weapon breaking in general, or is it something more specific?

The poor overall management of the inventory is a bigger issue than the breaking, but the breaking seems totally random and unbalanced and completely arbitrary in addition to being too quick in general, yeah. But again, the management hurts more.
---

digiiiiiiiii posted...

The thing is, the issues I have with the game are like ... easily patchable. Nintendo won't do it, of course. But the inventory stuff and other issues I have are so easily fixable.

That's why I personally get way more irritated at the game than I "should". I'm totally fine with accepting "soft flaws" in games that kinda suck but I understand why they did it and can't really think of a better solution, vs "hard flaws" that I know how to solve in a better way. The flaws in this game though are the hardest, densest, most flabbergasting flaws I've ever seen. It could've been SO GOOD.
---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

Someone said he gave Hyrule Warriors a 9.5

lol
---

I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "inventory management" then. I felt constricted by the limited inventory slots at first (8 melee weapon doesn't seem like enough), but those can be expanded quite a bit... I think to 30 or something. Of course, that would require an incredible level of exploration to find the required upgrade materials, but that's what the game's all about.
---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

Do you dislike the weapon breaking in general, or is it something more specific?

Weapon breaking AND everything related to it:
1. Weapon durability
2. Combat
3. Limited inventory slots
4. Finding korok to upgrade inventory
5. Finding the damn NPC to upgrade when you have enough koroks
6. Exploring in general

All those individual systems are damaged heavily by weapon durability, simply by being related to it. I call this "house of cards" design where everything falls apart when there is 1 flaw (vs "spiderweb" design where a system can be broken/ignored and the rest of the game still stands strong).
---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "inventory management" then. I felt constricted by the limited inventory slots at first (8 melee weapon doesn't seem like enough), but those can be expanded quite a bit... I think to 30 or something. Of course, that would require an incredible level of exploration to find the required upgrade materials, but that's what the game's all about.

I guess this isn't the topic for it but it blows my mind that you can't drop weapons from the quick menu.
---

Oh yeah, that's a flaw for sure. I don't mind the weapon durability but that oversight is annoying.
---

Still can't get on the site, was it hit again?

I doubt I'll ever play Breath because what it brings to the franchise are all things I generally dislike in games, but it seems fine and seems like it does those well. What score did he give it?
---

Yeah, don't do stuff like this.

I don't agree with the review in the slightest (the whole thing basically centres around his dislike of survival games) but come on.

Anyway, still the number one game on GameRankings and OpenCritic, so if you need to hang onto aggregators, there's that.
---

I was fine with weapon durability until all my bows broke during a boss fight and it was too hard to get close and melee him so I spent like 10 minutes throwing bombs at him to get the last sliver of health off all while using all my health items.

I really really don't get why they couldn't have gone with a MH style weapon durability.
---

"Oh no! I'm so disturbed that a game that I love is not loved in the way I love it. Zelda's blah blah blah score is now lower than perfection"

*Breaks a person's server*

Numbers, aggregates, and review scores for subjective experiences is probably one of the worst aspects in this community. Yahtzee criticizes every game in existence, and refuses to give scores for the very reason presented here: a festering, incredulous, mess of people thinking a 7 or HATE/10 makes any bit of difference to one's personal enjoyment of an experience.

Entitled f***ing losers. Maybe learn what subjective versus objective means while growing up. This situation makes video gamers look like insecure, butthurt NEETs or something.
---

foolm0r0n posted...

Finally I can stop copy/pasting my giant post about complaints about the game and just use this.... thanks Jim!

Although he praises the art direction too much, I think the weird cel-shading + low res textures combo is terrible. Everything else is scarily exact to my thoughts though, down to the 7/10.

yeah similarly Johnny Millennium put out his review over the weekend too and I can point to that when people ask how I feel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFls8ZNlOog
---

ninkendo posted...

yeah similarly Johnny Millennium put out his review over the weekend too and I can point to that when people ask how I feel

There are probably 1 million posts/videos out now that you can point to
---

Funny how the most attention whoring reviewer is the one to give a low review, totally shocking and unexpected

To be honest, the real shocking thing is how it took so long for someone to do it - we all know how Jeff Gerstmann changed from a nobody to a internet celebrity in just a matter of hours, someone copying him sooner or later was expected
Of course it has to be Sterling
---

... Jim sterling?

From my dad wrote a porno?
---

I'm honestly surprised the review average is so insane despite design choices that risked alienating or pissing off so many people. I can see how people would simply hate weapon durability, and while I haven't seen the dungeons yet, I hear they're a big departure from the ones usually found in 3D Zeldas.

The last Nintendo game this highly reviewed was Mario Galaxy, but I don't think it was nearly as risky.
---

CaptainOfCrush posted...

I'm honestly surprised the review average is so insane despite design choices that risked alienating or pissing off so many people.

It's because everyone else was HONEST about giving a 10 in exchange for large amounts of Nintendo money, unlike this attention whore. Or if they weren't good enough for the paid review, they were HONEST enough to fear the rabid violent backlash that would come from giving the game any less than a 10.
---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Yeah, don't do stuff like this.

I don't agree with the review in the slightest (the whole thing basically centres around his dislike of survival games) but come on.

Anyway, still the number one game on GameRankings and OpenCritic, so if you need to hang onto aggregators, there's that.

So is he not entitled to dislike survival games?

Lots of people dislike survival games, can a review not be relevant for them? Are you only allowed to review games if you're going to love them?

Your whole issue here seems to be, "he doesn't like this style of game." Isn't that LITERALLY what a reviewer is supposed to tell you?
---

Terastodon posted...

Lightning Strikes posted...

Yeah, don't do stuff like this.

I don't agree with the review in the slightest (the whole thing basically centres around his dislike of survival games) but come on.

Anyway, still the number one game on GameRankings and OpenCritic, so if you need to hang onto aggregators, there's that.

So is he not entitled to dislike survival games?

Lots of people dislike survival games, can a review not be relevant for them? Are you only allowed to review games if you're going to love them?

Your whole issue here seems to be, "he doesn't like this style of game." Isn't that LITERALLY what a reviewer is supposed to tell you?

It is clearly the reviewer's job to give everything a 9+ out of 10 and whisper sweet nothings into every reader's ears simultaneously. Duh.
---

Zelda fans being crazy is nothing new

swordz9 posted...

fans being crazy is nothing new

Fixed.
---

Jim Sterling is an attention whore. His review doesn't seem too whorish. He really doesn't like much in the world.
---

Imagine getting weapon durability wrong in 2017

But it's Nintendo! Weapon durability done right™.
---

DLC done right™
Account system done right™
Paid online done right™

Am I missing anything that Nintendo is doing better than the competition?
---

Didn't he do that annoying thing where he cries about how other reviewers are saying the opposite thing than him? Because if so, no sympathy tbh.
---

I think people blow weapon breaking wayyyy out of proportion. Most of the regular weapons don't break easily, only the monster drops and rusty ones do. You're meant to use those as temporary weapons in fights rather than carrying them around as your primary weapons. I tend to pick them up just to throw at enemies; it does a ton of damage and it destroys the weapon meaning they can't use it. The only other time I've had trouble with weapons breaking was when I fought really strong enemies with not strong enough weapons. I quickly learned that maximizing my damage was far more important that wailing on them with a ton of hits (even if I could still win either way), so now I always save my strongest weapons for them and eat strength boosting food to get the most out of each hit.

It's easy for weapon breaking to be annoying if you make mistakes in how you handle your weapons. That's what I thought when I started out. But when I learned more about how to use what I found more intelligently, it became really fun because I had to put more thought into how I attacked enemies.
digiiiiiiiii posted...

CaptainOfCrush posted...

I guess I'm not sure what you mean by "inventory management" then. I felt constricted by the limited inventory slots at first (8 melee weapon doesn't seem like enough), but those can be expanded quite a bit... I think to 30 or something. Of course, that would require an incredible level of exploration to find the required upgrade materials, but that's what the game's all about.

I guess this isn't the topic for it but it blows my mind that you can't drop weapons from the quick menu.

You can drop them on the ground just by pressing R.
---

The Mana Sword posted...

The review seems fair to me. I don't have much of an issue with the annoyances he outlined, but I think most of them are definitely problems with the game.

This exactly. There was a lot of thought put into his pros and cons, and he even admitted he liked the game at the end. This is the kind of decent review someone could easily look at and decide what bothered him doesn't worry them. People really need to lighten up and allow an alternative viewpoint. >_>

I was expecting him to have blasted the game with a weak first impression from the reaction but this guy seems to have given it a fair shot.

Well, I dunno, it's just
"If one person tells you you're drunk, and you feel fine, ignore him. If 82 people tell you you're drunk, go and have a lie down"
---

Terastodon posted...

Lightning Strikes posted...

Yeah, don't do stuff like this.

I don't agree with the review in the slightest (the whole thing basically centres around his dislike of survival games) but come on.

Anyway, still the number one game on GameRankings and OpenCritic, so if you need to hang onto aggregators, there's that.

So is he not entitled to dislike survival games?

Lots of people dislike survival games, can a review not be relevant for them? Are you only allowed to review games if you're going to love them?

Your whole issue here seems to be, "he doesn't like this style of game." Isn't that LITERALLY what a reviewer is supposed to tell you?

He's entitled to not like it, I don't know why you'd bother to critique something for not being to your personal tastes though. Nothing to be gained from reviews that are just "I don't like *genre*" since that says nothing about the quality of the work. I like Jim, I follow his stuff and listen to his podcast, but it's been obvious he wasn't going to love this one for a long time because of the kind of game it is rather than its quality.

It's why review sites give reviews to people who are accepting of genres rather than to people who don't like them.
---