I really dislike how most video essays are just plot summaries with descriptions of game mechanics and some surface level observations, like "The game teaches you how to play without any tutorials" or "When I shoot it feels good, because good animation and sfx". It's like the authors of these videos don't have any original thoughts and just repeat the same talking points they saw on reddit over and over again. Good video game essays always bring something new to the viewer. I found it weird that Matthematosis is on the thumbnail of this video, considering how his videos are usually written well, with no bloat and some interesting criticisms. His Mega Microvideos series are genuinely brilliant and show that you don't need a two hour long Phoenix Wright video to point out how well its presentation is handled. Then there's Tim Rogers with his terribly bloated videos, but at the same time, his writing and video structure can only be described as "Tim Rogers", this is how unique his essays are. Jason Graves, Sean Seanson and many others in retro videogame circles talk about obscure/weird games that you might've never heard of before. Running Shine, while doing plot summaries, makes the funniest videogame content. Act Man says that new AAA game is bad.
Matthew is on the thumbnail and yet he’s the only one who’s actually trying to make games, and ha any far the most succinct and well written videos out of all the “good reviewers” mentioned in the video. Ironic.
Only one good point that you do have which i have to agree: It is not that uncommon for people to gravitate towards having a certain opinion of a game by only watching one review, BUT: Game essays, and game reviews in general aren't supposed to and never will be concrete ways of judging a game, as they are opinions and nothing more, some more well constructed, others much more superficial, but all of them are opinions and if someone is "manipulated", and the point of essays is much more on the creator showing what he thinks about the game and that's what people mainly enjoy. A game being well made and a game being good aren't necessarily connected, indie games exist :P And cooking at the same level as a chef and cooking at your home to do a sandwich are entirely different things and one obviously demand much more technique, resources and practice to do. Also, if you really want to learn stuff, books and articles are much more in-depth then something as a Oversimplified book :/
unfortunately many people do find essays as concrete objective evidence that something is good or bad despite the fact that the video's an opinion piece
So if you buy a new car and it breaks down, are you not allowed to complain because you never made a car before? Making cars is hard and not everyone can do it. The point of the analogy is that you don't need to understand an item from a creator's perspective to judge it from a consumer's perspective. By your own logic, you're not allowed to like videogames either unless you've made one. Why does that logic only apply to criticisms? Videogames are literally made to appeal to consumers. How are we unqualified to have opinions on what's designed to appeal to us?
I really dislike how most video essays are just plot summaries with descriptions of game mechanics and some surface level observations, like "The game teaches you how to play without any tutorials" or "When I shoot it feels good, because good animation and sfx". It's like the authors of these videos don't have any original thoughts and just repeat the same talking points they saw on reddit over and over again.
Good video game essays always bring something new to the viewer. I found it weird that Matthematosis is on the thumbnail of this video, considering how his videos are usually written well, with no bloat and some interesting criticisms. His Mega Microvideos series are genuinely brilliant and show that you don't need a two hour long Phoenix Wright video to point out how well its presentation is handled. Then there's Tim Rogers with his terribly bloated videos, but at the same time, his writing and video structure can only be described as "Tim Rogers", this is how unique his essays are. Jason Graves, Sean Seanson and many others in retro videogame circles talk about obscure/weird games that you might've never heard of before. Running Shine, while doing plot summaries, makes the funniest videogame content.
Act Man says that new AAA game is bad.
Matthew is on the thumbnail and yet he’s the only one who’s actually trying to make games, and ha any far the most succinct and well written videos out of all the “good reviewers” mentioned in the video. Ironic.
Matthewmatosis fans are sheep. I bet his game will flop of it ever comes out. 😅
I agree for any piece of media look into the media yourself to decide if it's good or bad.
Only one good point that you do have which i have to agree: It is not that uncommon for people to gravitate towards having a certain opinion of a game by only watching one review, BUT:
Game essays, and game reviews in general aren't supposed to and never will be concrete ways of judging a game, as they are opinions and nothing more, some more well constructed, others much more superficial, but all of them are opinions and if someone is "manipulated", and the point of essays is much more on the creator showing what he thinks about the game and that's what people mainly enjoy. A game being well made and a game being good aren't necessarily connected, indie games exist :P And cooking at the same level as a chef and cooking at your home to do a sandwich are entirely different things and one obviously demand much more technique, resources and practice to do.
Also, if you really want to learn stuff, books and articles are much more in-depth then something as a Oversimplified book :/
unfortunately many people do find essays as concrete objective evidence that something is good or bad despite the fact that the video's an opinion piece
youre right end of discussion thats it 😂😂😂 but this can just be extended to any youtube essay, not exclusive to video games
So if you buy a new car and it breaks down, are you not allowed to complain because you never made a car before? Making cars is hard and not everyone can do it. The point of the analogy is that you don't need to understand an item from a creator's perspective to judge it from a consumer's perspective. By your own logic, you're not allowed to like videogames either unless you've made one. Why does that logic only apply to criticisms? Videogames are literally made to appeal to consumers. How are we unqualified to have opinions on what's designed to appeal to us?
Sounds like your fault for buying a bad car.