@bathyj who doesn't like getting attention in the entertainment (movie, game, music) industry????????????

LOL!

Jim Sterling ran into a game locking glitch and he mistook the glitch as part of bad game design. after realizing the glitch didn't appear again he took back his review. It's not clear which version he tested.

^ so he isn't getting paid when posting his videos on Youtube? Yeah right. This whole " fiasco" got him 100K views in one day, go figure.

^ Yea, apparently none of this videos are monetized. Apparently all his money is make through patreon and merch. TBH pretty much every game/review website has merch store, at this point you're just looking for a reason to hate him... which is fine, but just come out with it. I could see why someone wouldn't like him, totally understandable. I personally don't mind the guy, for better or worse he says what's on his mind and what he thinks.

Bias?

The guy wanted to love the game and absolutely adores the new model of development they're trying to pioneer, why would he be trying to kill this game? He WANTED to love it and WANTS to see it succeed. It's why he took down his old video and even specifically talked to Metacritic to get his score first taken out of the metascore and then changed.

I am going to say almost assuredly this wasn't about click bait if it was this video wouldn't exist. It was just stupidity if were going to be brutally honest.

Jim is definitely the type of person who wants to be in the limelight, but at the same time he has shown a lot of integrity and personal responsibility.

@Ashlen
I do agree with you on that.

Clicks don't get him revenue as he runs no ads on his site. Traffic, or lack thereof, is meaningless to him. He's funded exclusively via donations.

After a certain number of followers on social media, an online personality gains royalty for each click. No ads needed.

Why would anyone want to listen to a review by a person that was raging when so many others did not? His rage is even more reason to write him off. How many games did he slam because of some inability to be objective and he let his emotions run unchecked. Sounds more like some annoying child than an intelligent, objective individual capable of rational thought. Thanks for making his backpedaling even more inexcusable.

He couldn't complete the game becaus it was bugged, hours of work and nothing to fix. How is he wrong? wtf? the code is bad so he is wrong? answer my question.

Never mind, I have seen you other comments in this thread and your just a biased loser.

Even if he loses a single viewer over this matter there is damage. The question is concerning how much. And Edmix is correct. This is a nobody on the internet and like so many others he has absolutely zero grading standards. You would be foolish to allow this individual to make decisions or sway you concerning your enjoyment. He is quite similar to that worthless angry joe. He has a shtick and no one should consider him a legitimate reviewer. He is an overblown potato with a mouthpiece that was given him by viewers.

@morganfell

"This is a nobody on the internet and like so many others he has absolutely zero grading standards"

I wouldn´t say "nobody"; his 1 out of 10 score for Hellblade alone on Metacritic, droped the game from 81 to 77. That´s a LOT of damage to your game image and potential comercial success these days and age where most gamers relies on Metascores rather than experience the game themselves.

He is a nobody.

His opinion does not affect me. He has not nor will he change my mind. I do not know him, I am only aware of the persona he portrays, but because he is demonstrated his whorish nature I seriously doubt I would like him as an individual.

A nobody.

He doesn't influence my life outside of providing some ridiculous amusement. Whether he lives or dies I could care less. I would prefer he leave any gaming related endeavor but it doesn't affect me if he stays. He is being laughed at by more than quite a few people, and no developer or publisher or developer is going to alter their plans based on his actions. Thanks to his latest debacle, his motivations are even more transparent than ever.

And you are looking at the metacritic affair in far too simplistic terms. That score will not affects sales. In fact, his actions have served to poke another hole in the ridiculous structure that is metacritic and that is as far as his impact extends.

Morgan a "nobody" isn't someone YOU don't like. You clearly don't know what a nobody is.

He's not a nobody. He is known throughout the gaming industry. He has worked for a few big name review sites. He is invited to panels to speak with game devs on how to improve things.

That's not a nobody.

A nobody is the guy who sings on the street with no signage deals.

A nobody is a guy making his first time game in his basement.

Jim sterling isn't a nobody.

Allsystem,

pronoun: nobody
1. no person; no one.
"nobody was at home"
synonyms: no one, none, not a soul, nary a soul
"nobody was home"
noun
noun: nobody; plural noun: nobodies

1. a person of no importance or authority.
"they went from nobodies to superstars"
synonyms: nonentity, no-name, zero, nonperson, nothing;

Jim Sterling is a person of no importance. Its relative. He isn't to me. At all. Over. Done. Out. One day you will learn people have the importance that you give them. I accord him nothing. Nothing for a nobody.

@morganfell

"And you are looking at the metacritic affair in far too simplistic terms. That score will not affects sales."

You don´t have to belive me. Do some research and you´ll find out more about devs threatening reviewers over bad scores on Metacritic. For real!

Jim has very clear grading standards, actually. Which is why the 7 he revised this too (despite wanting to give it an 8 or even a 9) is still considered "Good" on his scale.

@morganfell

Sweet I guess Bethesda is a nobody because I don't buy their games.

I guess the Seth Rogan is a nobody because I don't like his movies

I guess EVERYONE is a nobody so long as they don't influence YOU.

That's not how that term is used and you know it.

That is precisely how the term may be applied. You are wrong, and were shown the door and just do not like it. If you have an issue, take it up with Websters. Definitions of multiple sources clearly point to this usage. If you do not like the facts, you do not get to change said facts. Tough. Suck it up buttercup.

And not only to me but in reality he is a nobody in gaming. Think about it. His loud pie eating mouth has had no real impact on gaming. None. In the grand scheme of matters he is nothing, not even a speck in gaming. Were he a developer, a well known voice actor things might be different. He has written and said nothing of real impact in gaming. He uses his big trap to either praise or more often degrade the work of persons far better than himself. But this is to be expected from a nobody.

And I do not like Seth Rogan either but he is an actor. Your analogy, like your attempt to deny the use of nobody, fails. Try comparing like to like. Fat Jim isn't someone you compare to an actor. Instead he is no different than any nameless movie critic. He contributes nothing. Like any critic he is a nobody.

@ Shadow, if he had standards these would be written down in detail. They would be explained to those reading of listening to him bellow so they could understand by what accords he reaches his decisions. They would demonstrate to what he awards weight and for what he detracts praise or points.

And they would be inviolable.

But that is why such things as real standards have disappeared from print and the internet. Such standards prevent one from changing their mind on a whim and going against their own recorded standards because today "they felt like it". Or because their cash throw was threatened and they could not allow something like sticking to their guns to interfere with their bank account. They do not get to interject as much of their worthless personality into the equation.

And face it, reviews are no longer about true evaluation. Instead they concern the rockstar nature of ego driven writers who fail to comprehend they write about an industry in which they do not work. They often damn work they themselves in their talentless world are incapable of replicating. And they live to serve themselves and their own desires instead of conducting reviews for the target demographic. Yes, that would require removing their own personal likes and dislikes from the equation. A feat impossible when they really only write and review to serve their own ego.