-
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.
Mike Ybarra, Corporate VP of Xbox, says critics of an Anthem area are “whining” and it is “embarrassing to review with such a lack of knowledge”
- Thread starter Proven
- Start date
Air quoting reviews, stop the whining, "modern reviewers" as streamers or influencers who the gaming pubs see as more lucrative n beneficial these days for their end.
There is an obvious intent here fam
"objective reviews"
Here is an objective review of Anthem:
Anthem is a game of the video variety. It was developed by Bioware and published by Electronic Arts. You can play it on a game platform and use that platform's controller mechanism to play it. It has video graphics and sounds. I cannot give you a concrete release date because apparently being out, fully playable and open to further spending does not constitute a release, thus this is considered a subjective quality of the game, so it doesn't belong in this review. No score.
Have fun. (Not with the game tho, because "fun" is subjective, just have fun in general.)
Here is an objective review of Anthem:
Anthem is a game of the video variety. It was developed by Bioware and published by Electronic Arts. You can play it on a game platform and use that platform's controller mechanism to play it. It has video graphics and sounds. I cannot give you a concrete release date because apparently being out, fully playable and open to further spending does not constitute a release, thus this is considered a subjective quality of the game, so it doesn't belong in this review. No score.
Have fun. (Not with the game tho, because "fun" is subjective, just have fun in general.)
I completely understand that sentiment, but there's a lot of issues where streamers are often paid to play the game, and tend not to have the same separation between sponsorship dollars and review teams.
This is, of course, not all streamers. But the lines are more heavily blurred in the streaming space. And there's even "reviewers" for traditional websites that have this problem as well.
Agree with him in one way, not necessarily about this or any particular game - you are better off trying a game yourself, friends impressions, streaming etc. I had fun with red dead 2, but the reviews seemed disconnected from mine and pretty much everyone I knows expierence.
This is 100% true. The game does a piss poor job of teaching you how the various systems and perks work. IN fact, most of the time it's non-existent.
Ybarra like "reviewers don't know what they're doing" but then like "I don't do reviews because everyone has opinions" .... which is exactly what reviews are.
Bro.
C'mon.
Bro.
C'mon.
Did you see the one from Phil that I posted a few pages back? I thought that was even better.
Thanks for the reply, from all I've read it definitely sounds like the lack of on-boarding of the combo system is just one of the numerous critical issues the title has... it just seems that unfortunately this one has become a focus for the discussion.
Have to say this whole discussion does put a interesting spotlight on the growing popularity of "live service based" games and how they work with the traditional multi-title review model most major sites employ... People who review games for sites like Gamespot/Eurogamer and so on don't generally have the time to stick with a single game that continue to evolve as the years go on.
Not sure if there is a worthwhile potential solution or if we will continue to see those types of games mainly covered by sites and individuals that focus on said single title rather than the more major sites that try to cover all titles on release only.
Retweeting Crapgamer is the worst, understand people who are passionate about your brand but a guy like that who acts like a 12 year old console warrior is just toxic. Not to mention he has made racist comments in the past. Not a good look.
Yeah whats wrong with these people, i understand some of their games review pretty bad but this isnt the way to improve things.
I get the idea of being frustrated that someone doesn't like a game because they couldn't figure out controls that *you* think are easy. It's like recommending Monster Hunter to friends, but they give up on it because they're not used to the idea of dedicated weapon mechanics. And it's not like Monster Hunter isn't filled with tons of obscure mechanics that you need outside help to understand.
However, the problem with this tweet in general is that this is a game that was released to the public *early* and then reviewers had to base it on *those* restraints. People had to pay money, one way or another, to get early access with the game, yet now we're seeing people falling back on saying "oh it'll get better later". Not a great look when EA already put out an elaborate spreadsheet about how to play the game early!
However, the problem with this tweet in general is that this is a game that was released to the public *early* and then reviewers had to base it on *those* restraints. People had to pay money, one way or another, to get early access with the game, yet now we're seeing people falling back on saying "oh it'll get better later". Not a great look when EA already put out an elaborate spreadsheet about how to play the game early!
What I will say is that I don't fuck with reviews either. Playing it, watching videos and reading impressions on forums or listening to what my friends tell me is more than enough.
So following your argument, he is both discrediting Reviews and discrediting his own suggestion of Modern Reviews?
Trying to show emphasis on a word on twitter, Apparently Mike Ybarra does it... millions probably do as well:
Unless someone is going to argue that he's discrediting that as well.
Nobody is preventing 'journos' from being criticized. Ybarra, an executive for a major videogame company, is being criticizing for calling a review "embarrassing," because the person who wrote it was critical of how the game does not explain all of its mechanics, of note in this tweet, the combo system. I haven't played Anthem and I probably won't, but other's have said the same thing that this reviewer has said -- that the game doesn't do a great job of explaining the various systems at work. This is most likely the review that Ybarra is mentioning:
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/02/anthem-game-review-honestly-its-not-finished/
It's a well thought out, well written, balanced review of the game. There doesn't seem to be any "bias" informing this review. It doesn't seem unfair to Anthem. The reviewer writes that some of the gameplay is terrific and has some great moments, but that the game has some key flaws that should have kept it unreleased for a little while longer for them to focus on it. One of those things is that the reviewer notes the, apparently, terrible load times and that many of the systems aren't well explained in the game.
I don't see how being critical of those flaws is embarrassing as Ybarra suggests.
Also, I'm not sure why anybody would think that a videogame review is anything but subjective. Criticism of entertainment and media is subjective by nature because enjoying arts and entertainment is a subjective thing. This reviewer doesn't imply that his review is anything but any other person's review.
I've seen combo come up I thought it was like if u playing storm u freeze enemy and a teammate hits with their special after
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a reviewer to look for a combo system in a game with extensive melee combat. I can't really speak to the particulars of Anthem, but even Klepek says that they are mentioned somewhere in the menus.
Great, now I'm gonna get fired for not hitting my word quota.
Damn you, objective reviews!
Huh, so he just always does that. He really is Trumpian.
Today I learned I really don't like Mike Ybarra lol
That's obviously not what I meant. A review just doesn't really give you the information necessary to disagree unless you've played the game. You just get one guys opinion, and selected facts meant to support that opinion. Whereas actually watching the game, as Ybarra suggests, does let you get a fairly decent impression - you can see that the load screens are long, the dialogue is good/bad, get a sense of the gameplay.
(I don't think reviews are worthless, but their value is as criticism not consumer advice. And even that value disappears if people aren't allowed to criticise them)
Thankfully, there is no prerequisite of "talent" to form an opinion about a piece of entertainment.
Patrick went digging for an explanation after he saw "Aura Combo" mentioned on a loot item he picked up. The game doesn't tutorial this rather large mechanic by all accounts and that is pretty piss poor design.
ah, quotes make words have different intent then i initially thought. :( my bad fam. he also said to play the demo and talk with your friends (gaming) so is that kind of hypocritical on him then? Influencial streamer says buy it because we assume he is paid to say this and then convinces the person watching because they cant make up their mind from what they see. then says, but wait, talk with your gaming friends and also play the game for yourself to see if you think you will like it. what is it ybarra? we need him to come clean and clarify what he means with "modern review".
this stuff is getting too comlpex; trump, ethics, position of power, gamergaters? damn i miss a lot of stuff here. yeeesh
I mean, I don't expect him to tank a game that his company is marketing, but at the same time, this response isn't that great either.
I like discussion. I don't think other peoples opinions help me decide which game to buy.
Wait...are combos/gameplay mechanics not instructed in game? If so, I am not liking what he is saying.
the pertinent parts if it is indeed the review he's talking about
doesn't seem to match ybarra's characterization at all
He's using these quotes to denote a term that has a specific meaning within the context of certain genres. It's neither emphatic nor Trumpian. He's rightfully getting shit in this thread but don't add this totally benign tweet to the evidence file.
I think we can criticize Mike Ybarra's tweets here without trying to compare him to Donald Trump. If Ybarra puts phrases in quotes when he informally writes something, which is a common thing that a lot of people do when they want to emphasize a certain word or suggest something is an uncommon phrase, that doesn't make him "Trumpian." The President of the United States having a basic lack of understanding around communication, tone, and history, and then putting that on display every day, is an embarrassment because he's the leader of the most powerful country in the world and he's incredibly influential because of that position. Ybarra might be a mid-level exec of a videogame company, but him making informal posts on twitter in a particular style, using quotation marks for emphasis, is not "Trumpian."
That diminishes the unprecedented nastiness of Trump, and loses focus on where Ybarra deserves criticism.
(In this post, I put "Trumpian" in quotes because it is a word someone else is using to describe Ybarra. That does not make me "Trumpian.")
Last edited:
User Banned (1 Day): Trolling
People are outright defending his bullshit and my trolling is the thing getting called out lol
It's not that gravely important. Time to go "play" Apex.
Aaaaalllllll this because that stupid over blown tomb quest lmao
Talk about a butterfly effect
Talk about a butterfly effect