A hundred thousand views, only fifteen comments, of which at least one-fifth boil down to "he didn't like the games I like and said so, and therefore I, in my infinite wisdom, have concluded that his reviews are not real reviews, he didn't play the games in question 'correctly' and he sacrifices journalistic review for the sake of humour." Gentlemen, it is possible to be both funny and simultaneously bring up legitimate criticisms. Furthermore, just because the reviewer didn't like the games you liked, it doesn't automatically invalidate what he's saying. Nor is it an attack on you. If your sense of self-identity is so fragile that you interpret a point made against something you liked as a direct attack upon you, your choices or your character - well, perhaps a little self-reflection might be in order. Who are you? What do you want? Not what media have you enjoyed consuming in the past, but what aspects of your own personality does that media highlight and examine, and in so doing cause a cathartic broadening of one's horizons? What, in essence, did the art that touched you most keenly make you think and feel about yourself and the world in which we live? What gives you the right to declare someone's opinions legitimate or illegitimate, when subjectivity is essential to the definition of an opinion? If you can do that, and write Yahtzee's reviews off as meaningless fluff because it didn't toe the desired line, what is stopping anyone from simply declaring your opinion of his opinion as illegitimate in exactly the same way? Nothing, that's what. A world where that were the accepted paradigm would be a world of ceaseless, screaming anger in a recursive series of monotone echo-chambers; all gnashing and railing against one another; never once sharing or evolving an opinion and hence introducing a foreign and fresh perspective, but calcifying all human discourse into a polarised brace of extremes - an endless conga-line of "us" and "them", of "acceptable" and "intolerable". No room for middle ground, nuance, growth or compromise; only ever heading towards the binary conceit of unconditional worship on the one hand and thoughtless disdain on the other. That is beneath you, and beneath all of us. We are all endowed with reason and consciousness. Do yourselves a favour and open your mind to the possibility that even someone who is seemingly your diametric opposite in conduct and world-view is capable of producing a sentiment that you might - potentially - agree with, find useful, or allow you to understand something in a new light that your unaltered perspective would never have produced. To write it all off because you felt like you were being criticised instead of the piece of media is nothing more than self-obsessed petulance. Yes, he's flawed. So are you. So am I. So are we all. We wouldn't be human otherwise, and our existence would be a smooth train ride from in the womb to in the ground with nothing to define the intervening time.
I love how his Pokémon BW review demonstrates how very little he played of it because honestly it's obvious from the getgo that N is a figurehead. But then there are people who finished the game who still think he's the actual boss and that's disappointing.
Usually he plays enough up until he knows his opinion won’t change, yea it’s unfair and I used to dislike Yahtzee for this but ended up on his side. Just took growing up honestly. Pokémon sucks
Seriously, Yahtzee can be funny, but being a critic and making actually criticism comes at a second priority. Especially when you see his reviews on Sonic or Batman games.
