No I think you can PM pretty much any moderator they will all probably have the same reaction of chuckling and then ignoring your request.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Jim Sterling: Shadow Of The Tomb Raider - A Shadow Of Its Former Self (READ OP)
- Thread starter John Bender
- Start date
No I think you can PM pretty much any moderator they will all probably have the same reaction of chuckling and then ignoring your request.
Jim does good work in the battle of exploitative microtransactions and pro consumer to a fault. His reviews aren't universally negative and he concedes high notes on games he feels negatively about.
He though will kick someone's favorite puppy of a video game franchise in a review that creates these responses. Honestly, if you know you don't like him, don't watch. Don't give him the views. Move on. That should be a rule of thumb for most media but, alas, here we are.
He though will kick someone's favorite puppy of a video game franchise in a review that creates these responses. Honestly, if you know you don't like him, don't watch. Don't give him the views. Move on. That should be a rule of thumb for most media but, alas, here we are.
They are not watching it. They read the thread title and decided to go all in attacking a fellow Era member.
Oh look that. When people start seeing through the BS in your post you start twisting it to people attacking you for your opinion. Get real.
The guy is sharing his opinion on the game and it's one that other reviewers have also shared. Wtf with everyone freaking out every time someone isn't in love with your favorite games?
"I'm the real victim here"
Nobody's reactions to you are any harsher than your reactions to Sterling. Think about that, if that's at all possible.
Please do tell exactly which of these posts consist of "jumping down your throat"? One of them is even agreeing with you somewhat...
These are all pretty civil questions asking you to explain your position further, which you have refused to do and instead tried to act the victim, which is frankly pathetic. Please, do PM a mod and ask them to take a look at this thread by all means.
Exactly. What happens to posters in Angry Joe thread's who come in just to complain about why the dude gets his own thread? Same should apply here and in any other thread.
The problem is that his opinion doesn't find my hivemind opinion, so therefore it's invalid and I must notify everyone.
This dude is toxic. *a few moments later people politely ask how*
Woah people are down my throat for suggesting something without any evidence/statements/proof. Damn era has problems!
These shit backfire posts are quality entertainment
Woah people are down my throat for suggesting something without any evidence/statements/proof. Damn era has problems!
These shit backfire posts are quality entertainment
The funniest part about this post is this so called toxic video is one where he says the game is fine and inoffensive, it just doesn't really do anything special to stand out.
If that's our bar for toxicity then I need to be careful lol.
Honestly, the fact that he's complaining that the game doesn't have much combat or bombastic set pieces, and is mostly just exploring, gives me a much higher impression of the game as a whole.
Those were easily my least favorite parts in the reboot (never played Rise).
Those were easily my least favorite parts in the reboot (never played Rise).
I wasn't planning on getting this game but I gotta say that this dude is not to be trusted in terms of what games he likes cause he thinks MW3 was a good game and he has all sorts of other weird opinions too.
Woah, what the hell? Where did I say that critics should agree with me no matter what? And all the other nonsense you just posted. All I said was that sometimes I feel disconnected from critics, naturally when they have different opinions to my own. Why should I feel a connection to someone who holds wholly different opinions? I feel disconnected from Donald Trump too as I don't agree with his opinions either - are you going to get angry with me about that?
I've got no issue with Jim doing his fancy little videos though, nor them being posted on here. Jim has his opinions and if anyone has an issue with them, they can do their own YouTube videos with their own opinions.
No I'm not accusing you, I'm just frustrated at this idea of that people think of critics as for or against.
Instead of using a critics opInions to form their own opinion if a game. I'm sorry if I was aggrsssive.
imo it's where so much of the hostility in review threads come from. People only care about a score or a general like/dislike.
Not why a person like or disliked a game and how that applies to the readers own gaming tastes.
Some people here have said they like more non-combat and less combat and that means they might be more intreasted.
People need to stop thinking that it's wierd critics don't agree with them, and figure out why and if that's because of personal video game tastes.
Why is someone liking a game you don't like "weird"?
This is what I don't get. There's more than a handful of posters in this thread throwing out stuff that essentially boils down to "well I like the game so screw you sterliing!" Why does the second part even come into it? What's wrong with just disagreeing, why does the person you're disagreeing with need to be insulted?
I really don't get it. It's opinons on video games, people really need to stop taking them so seriously. Like, he's "not to be trusted" because he likes MW3? That's an absurd thing to say.
I don't like reporting people and always avoid doing it unless it's clearly some racist or homophobic shit.
But this fucking thread is testing me.
It's becoming impossible to have a conversation about certain games on Era, especially in certain contexts. Like Sterling threads. And review threads in general.
Every single post on Era should be accompanied by the verified age of the poster. For all to see and admire what comes out of the mouth of supposed adults.
But this fucking thread is testing me.
It's becoming impossible to have a conversation about certain games on Era, especially in certain contexts. Like Sterling threads. And review threads in general.
Every single post on Era should be accompanied by the verified age of the poster. For all to see and admire what comes out of the mouth of supposed adults.
No, Sterling is just genuinely pretty terrible. He's a shock jock of games commentary, but all he does is demonstrate his ignorance of video game development while using copious amounts of toilet humor like that makes him "edgy". There are plenty of people out there who can call out lootboxes, shitty monetization, and pay to win that he doesn't offer anything unique, and just calling something shit a dozen different ways isn't exactly quality commentary.
And the thing is, a year or so ago I was actually defending him on ERA because he put actual effort into his work.
That makes absolutely no sense in the context of any of those posts. Sounds like you just wanted to get your irrelevant 2 cents in.
The level of hostility and defensiveness in this thread is completely unreasonable. This is a video game review made by a YouTube personality. Watch the video and share how you feel or don't post. If you're only here to say how you hate Jim Sterling, don't post. If you're only here to say people should stop giving him attention, don't post. This thread has far more meta-commentary about Jim Sterling than anything to do with the actual video content. Stay on topic or you will be moderated for derailment.
I am just siding with the fact that Raider is good. Thats it.
Agreed.
It always plays out like this:
If it confirms their bias, it's gravy. They may or may not respond and if they do, it's a civil one liner.
If it runs counter to their bias, why does this person get their own thread? Person is toxic. Person misses the point. Etc. Etc. And then other posters respond. Initial negative poster defends their accusation or attacks others poster. We come full circle.
Protip: Criticizing something and hurting your feelings because he called a game you like bad is not "toxic content"
The best part is he didn't even call it bad! He talks at length about how it's not a bad game.
Yeah that's true.
I mean, personally I only listen to Sterling's stuff on broader industry matters, I don't care much about his actual game reviews unless he's being funny dunking on Konami.
It's pathetic isn't it.
The video is fine. Nothing he says in it is even remotely inflammatory or unreasonable or out of kilter with other reviews. This game has kind of had a "meh, do we need this?" vibe about it from the moment it was announced; very much including the reaction on this forum. Reviews, not just Jim's, very much seem to back that up.
But no, let's relentlessley dogpile on the reviewer because we're fucking pathetic children.
Sterling has his own style. I like some of his content and i dislike some of it. That being said, his content is not even being discussed in this thread due to all the shitposts whose only contributions are personal attacks on the person. Again. Like in every thread about his content.
Feel free to make a 'Jim Sterling is terrible' thread. This thread is still about his review of Shadow of the Tomb Raider, even after the derails. To which i don't want to contribute any more.
So basically Jim does a video that says Rise did not raise the bar from the last iteration for him - not saying it sucked or was awful, and I may be misquoting here but I think he said repeatedly that it was "Just OK." How on earth is that TOXIC. Toxic behavior would be closer to some of the reactions that the world is coming to an end because he only said the game was "OK" aka nothing special.
If a youtuber can't post their lukewarm impressions of a game without people getting set off by that, I hope people can learn to take five and calm down and think twice about posting their initial reaction.
Jim clearly liked the last two Tomb Raider games. He liked the combat. He liked the chase sequences. Some people felt there was too much of that stuff and wanted less action and puzzles which is partly why the devs of this one have delivered that. Jim doesn't like this one as much. Is that shocking? Or toxic? Or trolling for clicks? He presents his impressions as just that, his own. He isn't saying 'the game is bad because it has a lot of underwater stuff'. He specifically says that you'll like this game if you liked the underwater stuff in the previous games. None of this sounded like 'trolling for clicks'.
I'm excited about the game (holding off to play it on my RTX in a couple of weeks) and I do think I'll like it more than Jim, because the combat and the chase sequences weren't my favorite parts of the last two games. But is that such a crazy thing? That people who loved that stuff wouldn't like this one as much?
Jim clearly liked the last two Tomb Raider games. He liked the combat. He liked the chase sequences. Some people felt there was too much of that stuff and wanted less action and puzzles which is partly why the devs of this one have delivered that. Jim doesn't like this one as much. Is that shocking? Or toxic? Or trolling for clicks? He presents his impressions as just that, his own. He isn't saying 'the game is bad because it has a lot of underwater stuff'. He specifically says that you'll like this game if you liked the underwater stuff in the previous games. None of this sounded like 'trolling for clicks'.
I'm excited about the game (holding off to play it on my RTX in a couple of weeks) and I do think I'll like it more than Jim, because the combat and the chase sequences weren't my favorite parts of the last two games. But is that such a crazy thing? That people who loved that stuff wouldn't like this one as much?
The thing is the person you quoted (post with avatar quote) highlighted "annoying as fuck" part, so that's the main reason why they avatar quoted Neoraider in the first place.
Yep.
Like i said before, everything that Sterling disliked about the game is music to my ears. I'm not really a fan of the combat in this series but i love the exploration aspect of it. Shadow sounds exactly like what i want from the series. Well, except for the narrative. That actually sounds dreadful. But i'm all in for the rest.
Sterling's opinion is literally just that. His opinion. It's just as valid as anyone's who has played the game. No one has to agree or disagree, but at least respect it as much as you'd like your own opinion respected. It's really not that hard.
The man critcizes toxicity in the game industry and game culture all the time, my dude. One of his most popular side series is about pointing out toxic comments and forum posts and how silly they are.
Further, nothing about this video is toxic. It's a funny pun title utilizing the game's title. Something can be a shadow of itself without being necessarily bad- just lesser.
Don't just throw around a word willy nilly because you disagree with someone or how they present their content. Like, yeah, he's legit been a toxic shitlord in the past but since about 2014 he's cleaned up his act a ton.
Jim's "schtick" varies too. In the main Jimquisition series he very much plays the persona of a holier than thou carnival barker. But in his reviews and podcasts he's clearly a very down to earth guy who, while having strong opinions, is more than happy to politely disagree with people- except on important issues like the social issues I like to believe we all agree with him about here on Era, along with consumer and worker rights. Maybe his Jimquisition character is slightly worth critique but I think most people who enjoy his stuff realize he's putting on a show and leave it at that.
That said I can see portions of his fanbase being a bit toxic in spite of him saying said people aren't welcome to indulge in his content, but that's more for the mods to handle individuals when they come up. What's really breeding an undesirable discussion environment on Era is people not engaging with the content before commenting. I do think, as Wily suggested earlier, the OP having given snippets of his review would be a boon to actually discussing the video rather than having it be a discussion about him and the title of it. But I don't see any harm in discussing modern Jim's content in the slightest.
Edit: I apologise, I spent like a half hour making this post and didn't see the mod note to stop off topic commentary. I'll leave it at this.
Last edited:
Thank you for this well put together post. I wish more people would try tosee through his "Jim Fucking Sterling Son" persona and see that he is a decent person altogether. If you don't agree with his views, fine. Just don't start attacking him personally in these threads and respect his opinion as one among many others.
Before the release it was palpable that some had emotionally invested their favorite platform in this game.
Watched the video. Jim states his reasons for not liking the game quite clearly. There's nothing hyperbolic or provocative in his impressions.
Hearing that there's less combat and a lot of underwater sections bums me out a bit.
Hearing that there's less combat and a lot of underwater sections bums me out a bit.
User warned: Console wars rhetoric
Don't you literally worship Nintendo?
I haven't played this yet but I think I'll wait for a big price drop. I always liked the combat in the reboots as well.
I was scared he'd be overly hyperbolic when he opened with thirty seconds of that one fish glitch, but I think he laid things out well and fairly. He was consistently throwing in cues for where he was talking about his personal reaction and where he was talking more concretely about things that were clever in general or seemed like a problem structurally. He really went out of the way to recognize the basic competence in the production, just that he felt the result was more middling and less exciting than he wanted.
I was someone who wanted less of the shooting in the earlier games, so the shift to more exploration and traversal is encouraging, but he definitely came away feeling like the new balance made it less engaging.
I was someone who wanted less of the shooting in the earlier games, so the shift to more exploration and traversal is encouraging, but he definitely came away feeling like the new balance made it less engaging.
what is everyone flipping out about? Watched the video and he just isnt enjoying the game? He liked the other 2 better, so what?
Beacuse they did not watch the video. They have a hate boner for Jim.
Looking back, I legitimately think some people assumed this was Jimquisition without having watched the video.
Let's be real, a good chunk of disdain for the dude comes from people who can't take that he talks crap about companies they personally worship, lol.
haven't played the game so can't really comment about the review per se, but when he sayd that the game is just "fine" but lacks the spark..i know what is talking about since it's how i feel about a lot of games
this being said, after his zelda review,me and jim doon't really have the same tatses in terms of games, so i duno if i would feel the same about this game
this being said, after his zelda review,me and jim doon't really have the same tatses in terms of games, so i duno if i would feel the same about this game