You really can't take that bloke seriously when he's clearly trying so mega hard to be contrarian for those sweet, sweet views.
Reason why a large majority of high end game reviewers are afraid to criticise Zelda!
His original review
Oh dear.
"The Videogame Show What I Done" is a parody show put out by Jim Sterling to take the piss out of terrible Youtube reviewers. The points he makes in it are supposed to be juvenile and dismissive, that's the joke.
Just on game reviewers, one on youtube called BigFryTV is a good one, very honest and knows his stuff, worth a look if you're thinking of buying a game.
He states in his second video that he enjoyed the game and that 7 is a good rating! Indicating that the genuine piss take things are probably what they are......piss takes. But any review he makes are that of authenticity, the rating 7/10 or the problems he points out in Zelda are not satire, they are genuine his own thoughts.
I would say go check his review on his website but like I mentioned previously, you can't because it's been attacked by butt hurt Nintendo fans, because Jim Sterling didn't bow down and worship the game...... this is what happens when anyone with any sort of credibility criticizes any Zelda game.
Also he is right, weapon durability in games is fucking dreadful and not fun at all.
I've seen them both, I've been reading Sterling since his Destructoid days and support him on Patreon when he decided to strike out on his own. Along with Schilling he's one of my go-to reviewers.
You don't also seem to know that Sterling gets DDoS'ed constantly. His views about inclusivity in video games seem to be the attack point though he was also vocal on GamerGate and other issues, he's commonly termed as a SJW. He was "attacked" after the No Man's Sky review, after his CoD reviews, after his MGS reviews. He's also constantly attacked by game publishers and game developers for different reasons.
Essentially people don't like him and he's a lightning rod. The idea that "this is what happens when you don't review Zelda well" is absolutely ludicrous. This is what happens when Jim posts a controversial review regardless of what game he's playing.
It's funny really isn't it? You're doing the climate change denial thing. There's 500 reviews that get it at 10/10 and one of if not THE best game ever made, and there's one bloke who says "yeah it's pretty good" and gives it 7/10 and your response is LOOK THIS ONE GUY IS TELLING THE TRUTH IT'S A GLOBAL CONSPIRACY THE REST ARE SCARED. About video game scores.
Jim has his own taste in games. His adores the Dynasty Warriors series which I happen to believe is badly designed trash. He likes most first person shooters whereas I think many of them are terrible. He's fully entitled to his views on a game but it doesn't overrank the masses of other critics who are also just as entitled to their review and scored it so highly.
To be honest I find your conspiratorial idea of game reviewers bowing to pressure about a score to be a bit bizarre all around.
Reason why a large majority of high end game reviewers are afraid to criticise Zelda!
His original review
I've seen them both, I've been reading Sterling since his Destructoid days and support him on Patreon when he decided to strike out on his own. Along with Schilling he's one of my go-to reviewers.
You don't also seem to know that Sterling gets DDoS'ed constantly. His views about inclusivity in video games seem to be the attack point though he was also vocal on GamerGate and other issues, he's commonly termed as a SJW. He was "attacked" after the No Man's Sky review, after his CoD reviews, after his MGS reviews. He's also constantly attacked by game publishers and game developers for different reasons.
Essentially people don't like him and he's a lightning rod. The idea that "this is what happens when you don't review Zelda well" is absolutely ludicrous. This is what happens when Jim posts a controversial review regardless of what game he's playing.
It's funny really isn't it? You're doing the climate change denial thing. There's 500 reviews that get it at 10/10 and one of if not THE best game ever made, and there's one bloke who says "yeah it's pretty good" and gives it 7/10 and your response is LOOK THIS ONE GUY IS TELLING THE TRUTH IT'S A GLOBAL CONSPIRACY THE REST ARE SCARED. About video game scores.
Jim has his own taste in games. His adores the Dynasty Warriors series which I happen to believe is badly designed trash. He likes most first person shooters whereas I think many of them are terrible. He's fully entitled to his views on a game but it doesn't overrank the masses of other critics who are also just as entitled to their review and scored it so highly.
To be honest I find your conspiratorial idea of game reviewers bowing to pressure about a score to be a bit bizarre all around.
Still wouldn't mind playing Breath Of The Wild in fairness, very easy on the eyes.
What were is views on that game? I've seen his comments on the game's hype but haven't seen what he actually thinks of the game itself. I know he has a video on it but I can't watch it whilst at work and I was thinking of heading out to buy the game later on - the price has dropped and I've read that the latest updates improve the game tremendously.He was "attacked" after the No Man's Sky review
There are conspiracies flying around that the reviews were paid for by Nintendo as they needed the reviews to be glowing in order to sell the Switch... Now I'm not saying they did but something like that is plausible, not just on Nintendo but anyone else's side as it has happened in the past (I do recall reading about a similar situation a few years back but cannot recall which game it was)..
It has happened in the past though and probably happens to this day. Especially on youtube.
It's happened once, and they were required to tell people it was a paid review, and was confined to a few Youtubers.
The idea that something like this game has got a high score because of widespread corruption rather than the simpler notion that it's just a very good game, is absurd.