The Angry Joe Show!

[Chancey289]

Watch his Last of Us review, just blind praise on the game, it's not that it's a different opinion or anything, the way he reviews it does sound like a paid review, even if it isn't a paid review he's still a sh***ty reviewer in end.

You know how silly you sound? Paid review? Man, gamers can throw that accusation around so casually without thinking how ridiculous it sounds especially when it's against a guy who's just an moderately famous internet celebrity.

Because money is thrown around like that. :meh:

You accusing a multi million dollar company of actually looking to bribe an internet reviewer, who many times have spoken and made fun of the dumb crap in the gaming industry and isn't even the most popular critic out there, to sell a game that common sense would tell you had money in the bank already. They can put nothing but the utmost confidence in games like that.

And overall, these conflict off interest are mostly nothing but silly gamers just disappointed in a review. If a game gets a high score, they were paid of. A low score, the reviewer doesn't understand or get the game. Isn't that how usually that song and dance goes?

Joe just simply likes The Last of Us and was very enthusiastic about it. I don't really care for it, but like I said, reviews are nothing but opinions and maybe yours should be the first and foremost the one you care about before any random interneter.

 

[Chancey289]

Haha poor Joe... he believed in that game so much...

Hey, we have Alien Isolation now which is a good Alien game. So I would say all is forgiven lol.

When you get right down to it, Colonials Marines never approached the Aliens franchise in the right way. Aliens was never about shooting Xenomorphs.

 

[xMobilemux]

You know how silly you sound? Paid review? Man, gamers can throw that accusation around so casually without thinking how ridiculous it sounds especially when it's against a guy who's just an moderately famous internet celebrity.

Because money is thrown around like that. :meh:

You accusing a multi million dollar company of actually looking to bribe an internet reviewer, who many times have spoken and made fun of the dumb crap in the gaming industry and isn't even the most popular critic out there, to sell a game that common sense would tell you had money in the bank already. They can put nothing but the utmost confidence in games like that.

And overall, these conflict off interest are mostly nothing but silly gamers just disappointed in a review. If a game gets a high score, they were paid of. A low score, the reviewer doesn't understand or get the game. Isn't that how usually that song and dance goes?

Joe just simply likes The Last of Us and was very enthusiastic about it. I don't really care for it, but like I said, reviews are nothing but opinions and maybe yours should be the first and foremost you care about before any random interneter.

For f**ks sake, I'm not saying he was paid to like it, I never said he was, I've simply been saying his blind praise of the game makes it seem like he's paid to like it, the whole video looks and sounds like a paid review, doesn't mean it is sure, but that's what it looked and sounded like. Watch the review and see how nuts he is about the game, after watching some of his previous videos and seeing how rarely he gives out a 10/10 score then suddenly he's praising this game like crazy out of nowhere, not saying the review's paid, but the way he reviews it seems like it is, do you see the difference?
Opinion or no, a good reviewer would know that Last of Us was good but not perfect, in his LoU review Joe just seemed like another mainstream cockhead like IGN & Gamespot etc.

 

[Foxtrot94]

You know how silly you sound? Paid review? Man, gamers can throw that accusation around so casually without thinking how ridiculous it sounds especially when it's against a guy who's just an moderately famous internet celebrity.

Because money is thrown around like that. :meh:

You accusing a multi million dollar company of actually looking to bribe an internet reviewer, who many times have spoken and made fun of the dumb crap in the gaming industry and isn't even the most popular critic out there, to sell a game that common sense would tell you had money in the bank already. They can put nothing but the utmost confidence in games like that.

And overall, these conflict off interest are mostly nothing but silly gamers just disappointed in a review. If a game gets a high score, they were paid of. A low score, the reviewer doesn't understand or get the game. Isn't that how usually that song and dance goes?

Joe just simply likes The Last of Us and was very enthusiastic about it. I don't really care for it, but like I said, reviews are nothing but opinions and maybe yours should be the first and foremost the one you care about before any random interneter.

Hey he explained he didn't mean Joe was actually paid. He cleared this, let's get over it now, please. PLEASE!

 

[Chancey289]

For f**ks sake, I'm not saying he was paid to like it, I never said he was, I've simply been saying his blind praise of the game makes it seem like he's paid to like it, the whole video looks and sounds like a paid review, doesn't mean it is sure, but that's what it looked and sounded like. Watch the review and see how nuts he is about the game, after watching some of his previous videos and seeing how rarely he gives out a 10/10 score then suddenly he's praising this game like crazy out of nowhere, not saying the review's paid, but the way he reviews it seems like it is, do you see the difference?
Opinion or no, a good reviewer would know that Last of Us was good but not perfect, in his LoU review Joe just seemed like another mainstream cockhead like IGN & Gamespot etc.

I didn't see what you typed later. But you still kinda did accuse of him of being paid for before saying "even if it isn't it sure sounds like it".

Eh, I don't even consider The Last of Us good. Pretty damn overrated and rather mediocre at best.

 

[xMobilemux]

I didn't see what you typed later. But you still kinda did accuse of him of being paid for before saying "even if it isn't it sure sounds like it".

Eh, I don't even consider The Last of Us good. Pretty damn overrated and rather mediocre at best.

Obviously he's not paid to review, but it's just way he goes at it, praising the game like crazy and bashing anyone who dislikes the game by calling them Xbox fanboys and so on.
It all sounds like him being paid by Sony to do it.

Last of Us isn't as good as reviews say, I enjoyed it but I won't play it again cause there's no point in doing so. Not exactly something that deserves countless awards and 10/10 scores.

 

[ReaperHunter]

I like AngryJoe his videos make for some entertaining stuff to sit back and watch. His Colonial Marines video was probably my favorite.

 

[Chancey289]

Obviously he's not paid to review, but it's just way he goes at it, praising the game like crazy and bashing anyone who dislikes the game by calling them Xbox fanboys and so on.
It all sounds like him being paid by Sony to do it.

Last of Us isn't as good as reviews say, I enjoyed it but I won't play it again cause there's no point in doing so. Not exactly something that deserves countless awards and 10/10 scores.

I doubt Joe went about bashing anyone. Especially with the whole "X-Box fanboy" thing. Joe plays nearly all his games on a Xbox. Sure he has other consoles, but he has primarily stuck with Microsoft.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Joe i do like that he comes off as more of a gamer giving his reviews out of fun & a love for gaming & not gaming doing reviews because it's a job.

He's passionate about giving his opinions, his input because he's a gamer, not solely because he wants to get paid or have a show, or push something as away of marketing it to influence gamers because a publisher threatens to pull advertizing dollars from your site.
And because of that i find him more trustworthy then i do the reviews of IGN, GameSpot, Sessler, etc.

Thats the main reason I started following his work too.

 

[Demi-fiend]

Eh, I don't even consider The Last of Us good. Pretty damn overrated and rather mediocre at best.

This.

Also, I'd heard that TLoS was one of the reasons why "Remember Me" was so overlooked, giving me yet another reason to hate that game.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a good game, but that won't make me hate it (and its unbearable hype-train) any less.

My favorite game reviewer is Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation.

While Yahtzee may have more engaging reviews than "Jimothy" Sterling, I tend to agree more with and like Jim more as a person than Yahtzee -- Yahtzee just seems... so much more condescending nowadays. Him being so jaded is probably from putting up with the games and the fans, so I hope Jim doesn't end up that way.

 

[Chancey289]

This.

Also, I'd heard that TLoS was one of the reasons why "Remember Me" was so overlooked, giving me yet another reason to hate that game.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a good game, but that won't make me hate it (and its unbearable hype-train) any less.

While Yahtzee may have more engaging reviews than "Jimothy" Sterling, I tend to agree more with and like Jim more as a person than Yahtzee -- Yahtzee just seems... so much more condescending nowadays. Him being so jaded is probably from putting up with the games and the fans, so I hope Jim doesn't end up that way.

I think a little cynicism is to be expected from anyone when your job demands you to complete and review a game pretty much every single week. This'll happen to any kind of critic whether it be games, movies, etc. However Yahtzee still makes good points even when he's talking about games I like. I mean, I love the MGS franchise and he basically hates it saying its story can be convoluted drivel and what not. You know, I might be more invested in to the franchise and characters than him, but I can also see why he feels the way he does. Do I agree? No. But I can see why he has that opinion.

The plus side is that he's still very comedic and a brilliant and witty writer. I finished his first novel Mogworld not long ago and it was really funny.

 

[Dante's Stalker]

I really like Jackfrags.
Felt so sorry for the bloke when he played and reviewed DmC. :thumbsdown:

 

[Dark Drakan]

This.

Also, I'd heard that TLoS was one of the reasons why "Remember Me" was so overlooked, giving me yet another reason to hate that game.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's a good game, but that won't make me hate it (and its unbearable hype-train) any less.

While Yahtzee may have more engaging reviews than "Jimothy" Sterling, I tend to agree more with and like Jim more as a person than Yahtzee -- Yahtzee just seems... so much more condescending nowadays. Him being so jaded is probably from putting up with the games and the fans, so I hope Jim doesn't end up that way.

Yahtzee is more a critic than a reviewer, he mainly picks out the flaws & negatives in games. I also watch his videos weekly & post updates on our other forum on his Zero Punctuation videos.

 

[Sieghart]

 

[Demi-fiend]

Yes but Yahtzee & Zero Punctuation are as honest as AngryJoe, without the fanboy aspect.

I don't believe that. Especially since I enjoy and think that Jimquisition does a better job talking about the issues in gaming than Yahtzee does.

Joe... is a caricature. He's not "serious" (not 100 percent anyway, like in his youtube copyright vid rants) most of the time; the yelling itself is just meant to keep the humor going.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Yes the Jimquisition does but that's the Jimquisition's focus, making gamers more aware of a broader subject then just simply reviewing individual titles themselves.
Comparing videos of course.......


Doesn't matter what AngryJoe is, i just don't find that as entertaining.
I do however can tolerate Joe's rants alot more than i can Boogie.
Boogie i just don't care for.

I like Boogie when he's talking seriously as he's an intelligent guy, not too fussed about his Francis videos though.

 

[Lord Nero]

''Joe i do like that he comes off as more of a gamer giving his reviews out of fun & a love for gaming & not gaming doing reviews because it's a job.

He's passionate about giving his opinions, his input because he's a gamer, not solely because he wants to get paid or have a show, or push something as away of marketing it to influence gamers because a publisher threatens to pull advertizing dollars from your site.
And because of that i find him more trustworthy then i do the reviews of IGN, GameSpot, Sessler, etc.''

Who says professional reviewers are NOT gamers who do their reviews for fun? Besides, most entertaining YouTubers actually get paid. So does Joe. So you could accuse him of doing reviews for the money too, or 'because it's a job'. Of course reviewing is a job. Does it being a job automatically make it untrustworthy? That kind of statement seems a bit intellectually dishonest, imo.
Right now, I'm even getting the idea that the 'advertisement' argument is kind of weak. I've heard that argument before, but honestly, most game reviewing sites seem very able of keeping themselves afloat, or even raking in heaps of cash. Especially sites like GameSpot and IGN - they don't need to depend on 'advertizing dollars'. I sometimes do get the impression that they might have agendas of their own, and choose their reviewers to reflect that agenda, but do I think they're paid off? No, I don't have much of a well-argumented reason to believe so.
It's all about choosing the reviewer who's right for you. If you know a certain reviewer is a huge H&S fan, there's a good chance he'll grade H&S games too high, because he's too emotionally invested. But even that is not a problem, because if you like H&S games, you'll probably find that your opinion coincides with that reviewer's in many ways. There are no unbiased reviewers.

 

[Chancey289]

''Joe i do like that he comes off as more of a gamer giving his reviews out of fun & a love for gaming & not gaming doing reviews because it's a job.

He's passionate about giving his opinions, his input because he's a gamer, not solely because he wants to get paid or have a show, or push something as away of marketing it to influence gamers because a publisher threatens to pull advertizing dollars from your site.
And because of that i find him more trustworthy then i do the reviews of IGN, GameSpot, Sessler, etc.''

Who says professional reviewers are NOT gamers who do their reviews for fun? Besides, most entertaining YouTubers actually get paid. So does Joe. So you could accuse him of doing reviews for the money too, or 'because it's a job'. Of course reviewing is a job. Does it being a job automatically make it untrustworthy? That kind of statement seems a bit intellectually dishonest, imo.
Right now, I'm even getting the idea that the 'advertisement' argument is kind of weak. I've heard that argument before, but honestly, most game reviewing sites seem very able of keeping themselves afloat, or even raking in heaps of cash. Especially sites like GameSpot and IGN - they don't need to depend on 'advertizing dollars'. I sometimes do get the impression that they might have agendas of their own, and choose their reviewers to reflect that agenda, but do I think they're paid off? No, I don't have much of a well-argumented reason to believe so.
It's all about choosing the reviewer who's right for you. If you know a certain reviewer is a huge H&S fan, there's a good chance he'll grade H&S games too high, because he's too emotionally invested. But even that is not a problem, because if you like H&S games, you'll probably find that your opinion coincides with that reviewer's in many ways. There are no unbiased reviewers.

Yea, but gamers can be very childish.

Like I said the typical song and dance of reviews: Game scores too high, then the reviewer was paid off. Scores too low, then the reviewer has no idea what they're talking about.

When you step back and look how many times that accusation of "conflicts of interest" is thrown around, it becomes ridiculous thinking that multi-million dollar companies have so much extra money and go out of their way to buy random internet opinions.

Now, does shady stuff like that exist? Of curse. You can see stuff like that when it comes to just some businesses in general. And considering the whole Shadow of Modor contract that was brought up specifically asking the reviewers to do certain things when tackling the game then yea, it's also in games.

But not on a large scale and anyone with common sense can see that. *sigh*