As far as I know the Loot boxes are also microtransactions and have been removed.
Apparently the guy runs by the name of WeWuzMekutur (I have no fucking clue m8). And he did this to pin Nintendo fanboys against Mario fanboys, but he didn't really accomplish that.
Also, at the bare, bare minimum. From me you won't see such thing as changing a score because of what someone might say or not. In the end, journalists are supposed to bring insight and not so much decide the fate of a thing. People give way too much impact to reviews, they do have an impact, but it's not supposed to be that big of a deal. I have received my first death threat already (And the guy assumed I was from Virginia... I don't know) so, I really can't say I'm scar...
Because the people who have been attacking Jim are reported to be Mario fanboys.
And because the people who took the hint were Jim Sterling fans.
Idiot.
Jim left Written Reviews a while ago and he always does them on video now. And at the time of writing the guy had ditched Written reviews altogether
Aha. And you see every website ever covering this if Pewdiepie says it.
He swapped to Video Reviews due to the BOTW Backlash
And that's what I did, do you see a Battlefront II review? Do you see a Shadow of War review? No? That's because I literally didn't buy into it. Even if I was provided with review copies I would've low scored it for the MTs
"There isn't any hard data to suggest this outrage isn't anything more than a few hundred people."
No, but there's a clear outrage against Loot Boxes in many social media websites. These Loot Boxes are negatively affectng gaming as we know it, and the major solution is to just ignore them.
As a journalist, I have to tell you that it's my job to think of EVERYONE (Not just the kids). This includes people who might be heavily affected by the microtransactions like adults with severe gambling habits. And believe me when I say that there is outrage, it's just unheard of because there are so many other issues that have bigger outrage as well.
It's legit bruh.
.... You did read the article right?
So, I guess I am part of that bottom of the barrel despite meeting the qualifications you just mentioned...
Glad to see you look at both sides of the spectrum, that was mostly the intention of the article
I mean, you can look at my gameplay of Cuphead that I did for the review. You can see I'm slightly above average in that regard. And I play everything at that level as well, because that's supposedly my job. Again, journalism isn't supposed to be something anyone can do.
See, this is a problem too. Because sometimes reviewers who specialize at the genre don't look at the average joe who doesn't know what the genre is. For example, when I talked about Cuphead. I focused on how casual gamers would react to it rather than how enjoyable it was for me. A lot of critics don't see that and create the misconceptions I talked about.
No, the amount of dislikes say that they don't agree with the opinion of the person in question. And many of the people here have shown the reasons why the comparison doesn't work.
What game journalists have nowadays is the lack of transparency. When I talked with fellow readers of mine, I took note that one of the main issues is the fact that the reviewers don't often show the gameplay they have. And that's a major issue considering that transparency is key. This is what makes people like AngryJoe so popular amongst transparent reviewers and critics,.
I mean, did you look at the playthrough GR posted?
Either that or they already implemented those again