Support NeoGAF

[Hasney]

I don't know... I can see this stuff being overlooked easily. Before they split the channels me and a couple of other people suggested cutting the videos down to the best 10-15 minutes. One guy actually made a dumb Monday super cut and it works.

I think that type of thing could be so much more accessible and appealing than an hour and 30 minute plus stream video.

Also another example of cutting the videos down making them instantly more appealing is the latest easy update episode. It's just damn good when it's cut down and edited nicely.

I think they should keep easy allies plays channel but do trimmed downed best of videos on their main page.

What do you guys think?

I think they don't have the manpower for that for individual streams. It takes a lot of effort, at that point we could have a whole new show most likely.

A best of when there's a bunch of material and just cut together the best bits like evry month or two depending on how many good bits there were ala Giant Bombs best of, sure.

 

[llehuty]

I don't know... I can see this stuff being overlooked easily. Before they split the channels me and a couple of other people suggested cutting the videos down to the best 10-15 minutes. One guy actually made a dumb Monday super cut and it works.

I think that type of thing could be so much more accessible and appealing than an hour and 30 minute plus stream video.

Also another example of cutting the videos down making them instantly more appealing is the latest easy update episode. It's just damn good when it's cut down and edited nicely.

I think they should keep easy allies plays channel but do trimmed downed best of videos on their main page.

What do you guys think?

It's a lot of work, they would need a bigger financial backing to afford that themselves.

 

[timmyp53]

They need a minimum wage intern editing video lol

It isn't necessarily hard but time consuming I admit.

 

[Tankard]

I don't know... I can see this stuff being overlooked easily. Before they split the channels me and a couple of other people suggested cutting the videos down to the best 10-15 minutes. One guy actually made a dumb Monday super cut and it works.

I think that type of thing could be so much more accessible and appealing than an hour and 30 minute plus stream video.

Also another example of cutting the videos down making them instantly more appealing is the latest easy update episode. It's just damn good when it's cut down and edited nicely.

I think they should keep easy allies plays channel but in addition do trimmed downed best of videos on their main page.

What do you guys think?

That's a lot of work for something very few people actually care.

 

[timmyp53]

That's a lot of work for something very few people actually care.

That's the point trying to make people interested in their stream content

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

I love this channel so much. My favourite reviews were always GTs (partially because of Jones' iconic voice)

 

[Hubble]

Having individual/separate channels is retarded. It will easily divert the typical consumer. Just have everything in one single channel. Easy.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Having individual/separate channels is retarded. It will easily divert the typical consumer. Just have everything in one single channel. Easy.

literally the only reason the second channel exists is for archival purposes and those that don't want to use twitch. The channel could cease to exist and people could still watch them on twitch archives.

 

[Tankard]

Having individual/separate channels is retarded. It will easily divert the typical consumer. Just have everything in one single channel. Easy.

You sure are on a roll after the Easy Allies name debacle.

 

[UrbanRats]

Having individual/separate channels is retarded. It will easily divert the typical consumer. Just have everything in one single channel. Easy.

Easy, cluttered and messy.
What's the big deal with being subbed to two channels instead of one?

 

[Szeth]

The second channel is literally just a twitch archive. It's not like last time where their content was split in two and you never knew what would be where.

 

[Auctopus]

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

I'd rather they use the Mandatory Update scoring system. Ahh, whatever.

 

[Hasney]

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

I'd rather they use the Mandatory Update scoring system.

They mean they use the full scale now and not one of those ones where a 7 is close to average. They've gone to good scoring now.

 

[Tankard]

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

I'd rather they use the Mandatory Update scoring system. Ahh, whatever.

That's what i think the entire gaming media should do, but even on a super hardcore gaming community such as Gaf you encounter so many people saying "bought" or "not buying it" after looking at metacritic and I realize this will never go away or they will lose views.

 

[llehuty]

Wow I don't know why I've never watched Tabletop Adventures, it's fucking fantastic.

Now I really need a game to scratch my D&D itch, what would you recommend guys?

If you have a 3DS, go with Crimson Shroud on the eShop.

The game is painfully short though (but cheap), and you can tell there are A-list team behind it (Directed by Matsuno and music by Hashimoto).

 

[The_Inquisitor]

Can I confess I actually didn't follow GameTrailers? So my first intro to this team was the formation of EzA. Well I know it's not much, but just pledged 1 dollar a month to the team. Good luck you all.

 

[Auctopus]

Can I confess I actually didn't follow GameTrailers? So my first intro to this team was the formation of EzA. Well I know it's not much, but just pledged 1 dollar a month to the team. Good luck you all.

I'd say about 70% in this thread never followed GT. Find an old Top 10 thread and you'll see hundreds of posts saying how "clueless" the team were.

 

[The_Inquisitor]

I'd say about 70% in this thread never followed GT. Find an old Top 10 thread and you'll see hundreds of posts saying how "clueless" the team were.

Okay dont feel so bad now lol. But I have started subbing to more podcasts outside the GB guys, and they provide a nice contrast.

 

[Don Draper's Hat]

Huber and Brad Wrestlemania Hype stream. Urgh, how I long for fun wrestling games again. Still looks great fun.

 

[RiverKwai]

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

He's not talking about math, he's talking about scale. A 3.5 on EZA is a good score. a 70 on Metacritic is not. That's the difference.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

I'd rather they use the Mandatory Update scoring system. Ahh, whatever.

That's why I said earlier, to you even but you blew it off as saying you can think for yourself, that the main problem people will have with with a 10 point system using 5 stars is that they will try to equate that to a metacritic score. Metacritic and other aggregates are breaking the guiding principles of individual review channels. Huber is right, mathematically 3.5/5 is a 7/10, however, on their review scale as they have outlined it is not so simple to equate it that way. A 3.5 is a well recommended game on the EZA scale, a 7 elsewhere would not mean the same.

Really hope EZA don't go to Metacritic so that their reviews aren't sullied by being fit into metacritic a scale instead of their own outlined one.

 

[brotkasten]

I loved Easy Update. Such a great and fun episode.

 

[timmyp53]

I loved Easy Update. Such a great and fun episode.

Yeah it was awesome. Good stuff Ian and kyle.

 

[samueljustice00]

I rarely watch or listen to podcasts, but I've seen each one at least three times on the EZA channel. So engaging!

 

[lowhighkang_LHK]

A 5 point scale is fine. But if you associate with metacritic, then you have to concede the fact that a 5 point scale will convert to a 10 point scale. And adjustments need to be made. Because in that case Ratchet and Clank becomes a 7.0 and Huber Will be the first to say that game is better than a 7.0

 

[Maligna]

That's the point trying to make people interested in their stream content

You could always do it for them, pro bono!

Having individual/separate channels is retarded. It will easily divert the typical consumer. Just have everything in one single channel. Easy.

Disagree completely. Streams were making shows harder to find on their channel.

 

[Hasney]

You could always do it for them, pro bono!

They've already said they wouldn't be comfortable with that.

 

[Naythan]

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

I'd rather they use the Mandatory Update scoring system. Ahh, whatever.

It is not simple math at all. It's not even really math. Holy shit.

 

[rtcn63]

To be fair, Nvidia thought 3.5 = 4.

 

[Auctopus]

ugh, Bloodburn'd on Twitter for that comment. Feels bad man, probably just gonna stay out of the conversation/community from now on.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

A 5 point scale is fine. But if you associate with metacritic, then you have to concede the fact that a 5 point scale will convert to a 10 point scale. And adjustments need to be made. Because in that case Ratchet and Clank becomes a 7.0 and Huber Will be the first to say that game is better than a 7.0

That's why I think sites should have the ability to opt out of Metacritic to maintain their scoring outline. Or maybe they do. Not sure how that process works honestly.

 

[Hasney]

That's why I think sites should have the ability to opt out of Metacritic to maintain their scoring outline. Or maybe they do. Not sure how that process works honestly.

Moat sites probably wouldn't anyway. It's probably some free extra traffic.

 

[Bloodworth]

ugh, Bloodburn'd on Twitter for that comment. Feels bad man, probably just gonna stay out of the conversation/community from now on.

What? Don't do that. It wasn't directed particularly at you anyways. Lots of people saying it.

I'm a little frustrated with that opinion, but I like having you around. Remember we fought among ourselves on this stuff as well.

 

[Man-is-Obsolete]

Moat sites probably wouldn't anyway. It's probably some free extra traffic.

Yea it is certainly having your cake and wanting to eat it too. I think Patreon supported sites can look at it a bit differently though where the fan base is grown much more differently than trying to create click bait articles and videos and needing traffic to survive.

 

[llehuty]

I mean, it's the description of the reviews:

Our ratings: 5 Stars - Masterful, 4 Stars - Excellent, 3 Stars - Recommended, 2 Stars - Lacking, 1 Star - Poor

You can't just convert it to a 10 point scale using maths if the criteria of the scale it's not the same. In a 10 point scale of most (of all) of the gaming review media, a 6 would never be a recomended game.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

If you have a 3DS, go with Crimson Shroud on the eShop.



The game is painfully short though (but cheap), and you can tell there are A-list team behind it (Directed by Matsuno and music by Hashimoto).

Level 5 should give a blank check to Matsuno to get him to make a full game out of that idea.

 

[Hasney]

Yea it is certainly having your cake and wanting to eat it too. I think Patreon supported sites can look at it a bit differently though where the fan base is grown much more differently than trying to create click bait articles and videos and needing traffic to survive.

For sure, but as long as your actual review isn't some random click bait, I don't think there's anything wrong with being on Metacritic even if you don't match their scale. Most serious newer sites are adapting the full scale of whatever system they have and are just on there anyway. Metacritic gonna Metacritic.

 

[rtcn63]

I mean, it's the description of the reviews:

So to quote Huber: "Context".

Spoiler

Whenever he says it during RE streams, I keep thinking he should be saying "world-building" or "background details". Lore? My Inigo Montoya just kicks in.

 

[timmyp53]

Having individual/separate channels is retarded.

You sure are on a roll after the Easy Allies name debacle.

Yeah constructive criticism/suggestions are fine. You don't have to ooze negativity like that.

Don't get me wrong, I love these guys and have done for years but Huber just tweeted "3.5/5 is not a 7/10". If you're just going to ignore simple math then they should just get rid of the score altogether.

I'd rather they use the Mandatory Update scoring system. Ahh, whatever.

That's why I said earlier, to you even but you blew it off as saying you can think for yourself, that the main problem people will have with with a 10 point system using 5 stars is that they will try to equate that to a metacritic score. Metacritic and other aggregates are breaking the guiding principles of individual review channels. Huber is right, mathematically 3.5/5 is a 7/10, however, on their review scale as they have outlined it is not so simple to equate it that way. A 3.5 is a well recommended game on the EZA scale, a 7 elsewhere would not mean the same.

Really hope EZA don't go to Metacritic so that their reviews aren't sullied by being fit into metacritic a scale instead of their own outlined one.

My thoughts:

There is nothing inherently wrong with a 5 score system in itself but the advent of metacritic really has altered the review process negatively. With Metacritics conversion and aggregate score being purely based on mathematics and occasionaly being weighed more heavily depending on outlet its pretty much cut and dry.

If EZA's review of Ratchet and Clank were to have made it to metacritic then it would have been the only mixed review to be featured on the site. When metacritic converts positive, negative, and mixed receptions purely on a 100 point system it pretty much is impossible to get an accurate representation of what a reviewer/site actually thinks or feels.

Seeing as though metacritic is too damn stubborn to stop existing(I find the site a bane on the industry) I think the best thing they could do is to get rid of the score altogether and fight the battle against metacritic. Pubs/dev and honestly I think creativity itself is is being held hostage by this damn site.

How awesome would it be to have something akin to how eurogamer does it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-02-10-eurogamer-has-dropped-review-scores

 

[llehuty]

Every company should give a blank check to Matsuno to get him to make a full game.

fixed

 

[AcademicSaucer]

fixed

That kickstarted mobile game he is somehow helping in looks really bad.

I really hope he is making a Tactics Ogre game in secret.

 

[Holundrian]

You can't just convert it to a 10 point scale using maths if the criteria of the scale it's not the same. In a 10 point scale of most (of all) of the gaming review media, a 6 would never be a recomended game.

I get so triggered when I read stuff like this xD, that's why I dislike any rating system that can be associated with numbers. It's so dumb, the concessions that are made to explain these ratings.... urgh.... suddenly numbers and math don't make sense anymore just for a stupid rating that's subjective anyway. Like why????

It's not like we have this thing that carries more nuance for interpretation... what's it called again? Words? Oh yeah words! But nooo let's use numbers instead, I mean 0.99999(etc) = 1 that's all the nuance you need!!!
When I see a number score to rate a game it feels so ill fit for the job it's like I'm seeing someone cutting paper with chopsticks.

Sadly I don't feel strongly enough to shit in every review thread about it.

Would love if more sites would do ratings systems like Jeremy Jahns(dude is doing movie stuff but it should still apply).
People would still argue about those but the ratings system is more fun and has way more leeway for shutup dude that's just how I feel.

"Play this if you're drunk"

(Don't read this post like it's too charged, I was more like babbling anyway xD)

 

[Karu]

People should treat Score Systems of websites as individual, self-contained entities. Metacritic defeats that purpose - it's still just a round-up of number, though, but that points me to only one conclusion: As reducive as Score may be, they are fine. It's the people (or some of them) that can't handle them. In some instances not at all, that's a bummer, but shouldn't be a concern to anyone imo.

 

[sora87]

Such drama over a score system, it's all very weird

 

[llehuty]

Easy update so good. That damn game is insanely weird but still good at the same time? Bless indie games. Also, the Don segment killed me, hilarious.

I get so triggered when I read stuff like this xD, that's why I dislike any rating system that can be associated with numbers. It's so dumb, the concessions that are made to explain these ratings.... urgh.... suddenly numbers and math don't make sense anymore just for a stupid rating that's subjective anyway.

It's not like we have this thing that carries more nuance for interpretation... what's it called again? Word? Oh yeah words! But nooo let's use numbers instead, I mean 0.99999(etc) = 1 that's all the nuance you need!!!

Sadly I don't feel strongly enough to shit in every review thread about it.

Would love if more sites would do ratings systems like Jeremy Jahns(dude is doing movie stuff but it should still apply).
People would still argue about those but the ratings system is more fun and has way more leeway for shutup dude that's just how I feel.

"Play this if you're drunk"

(Don't read this post like it's too charged, I was more like babbling anyway xD)

Yeah, I get your point. But I understand and respect why would they use the star system, that is their own thing.

 

[Elfforkusu]

I feel like the actual problem is metacritic, not individual score systems. That metacritic is incapable of more nuance than X/100 is not (IMO) a reason to recalibrate your score system to being out of 100.

I like 5 stars, really I'd prefer to not even have half stars. But I like EZA's system anyway!

 

[Holundrian]

I feel like the actual problem is metacritic, not individual score systems. That metacritic is incapable of more nuance than X/100 is not (IMO) a reason to recalibrate your score system to being out of 100.

I like 5 stars, really I'd prefer to not even have half stars. But I like EZA's system anyway!

Dunno how I feel about blaming metacritic for using numbers in the way they should be used.

 

[Elfforkusu]

Dunno how I feel about blaming metacritic for using numbers in the way they should be used.

Any catagorized rating system is ultimately going to run into the same problem, though. You could give a game a review score of "orange" and someone would figure out how to scale it to a point score out of 100. Presuming you're consistent with your scoring of games as orange vs apple vs banana.

e: I guess a slightly less absurd way to phrase this is that a 5 point scale is fundamentally different than a 100 point scale in regards to what the numbers represent. Whether it's a simple "6-10" or something slightly more algebraic, the numbers do not mean the same thing. When people (metacritic) treat them as if there's linear scaling, their system is objectively incorrect.

 

[Bloodworth]

Merely comparing numbers without understanding their inherent meaning doesn't make sense though. If I go to Europe thinking I need heavy winter clothes when it's 32 degrees Celsius, I'm going to have a bad time.

 

[Holundrian]

Any catagorized rating system is ultimately going to run into the same problem, though. You could give a game a review score of "orange" and someone would figure out how to scale it to a point score out of 100.

Would be worth it just to read the long post on how orange translates into a number.
Are we doing it by color space? 247/148/29 added together divided by 6?

Basically what I'm saying with this it's way less egregious to tell a crazy person to shut up for twisting something into something else that it isn't than to tell a tell a person to stop being crazy for using math on numbers.

Also more nuanced rating encourages a different atmosphere I'd argue.

Merely comparing numbers without understanding their inherent meaning doesn't make sense though. If I go to Europe thinking I need heavy winter clothes when it's 32 degrees Celsius, I'm going to have a bad time.

You can understand the meaning here through simple math though. It's just a conversion from one system into another one, retaining the integrity of the numbers themselves.

But yeah it's fine anyway in the end, It's not like I need to consider these scores anyway . It's also a tired argument. In the end if some people find enjoyment in scores I don't want to deny people that.