"Zero Punctuation" and "Dev Diary" by Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw - The only thing worth watching on The Escapist

[Linkalin]

tho here's a transcript:

I just read it and it was spot on in describing the nerd anxiety of wanting video games to be called art because they just wanted to be taken seriously / needed validation. I don’t know how old this article is but it was like reading an accurate prediction of time capsule.

But was the solution that the author given was that instead of arguing to Ebert about what is art, we should expand people’s definition on what is art and how video games can fall on it without actually focusing on graphical presentation, but more of the thing said in between the graphics, music, system? But be also argued tetris is art, which is just purely mechanical game. Unless what he was trying to say that Games is always been art based on the wikipedia definition of recurring pattern that elicit emotional response.

 

[BetterFuckChuck]

I just read it and it was spot on in describing the nerd anxiety of wanting video games to be called art because they just wanted to be taken seriously / needed validation. I don’t know how old this article is but it was like reading an accurate prediction of time capsule.

But was the solution that the author given was that instead of arguing to Ebert about what is art, we should expand people’s definition on what is art and how video games can fall on it without actually focusing on graphical presentation, but more of the thing said in between the graphics, music, system? But be also argued tetris is art, which is just purely mechanical game. Unless what he was trying to say that Games is always been art based on the wikipedia definition of recurring pattern that elicit emotional response.

what he was trying to argue is that games should be argued as art because of the elegance or sophistication of their mechanics and rulesets. rather than going "the 80 hour grind is slop, the real art is the graphics and story" instead going "the rulesets being fun for 80 hours is the art in question, it's keeping you emotionally engaged for that long" like tetris or soccer

 

[Linkalin]

what he was trying to argue is that games should be argued as art because of the elegance or sophistication of their mechanics and rulesets. rather than going "the 80 hour grind is slop, the real art is the graphics and story" instead going "the rulesets being fun for 80 hours is the art in question, it's keeping you emotionally engaged for that long" like tetris or soccer

That makes a lot of sense

Coming back to Yatzhee, I think he was more of a spectacle / writing sort of person. I don’t know why he felt in love with video game in the first place, but even back on his older review he always criticize the ludo-narrative dissonance (I hope I use the term correctly) of the tension between story and games. He never really criticizes something more deeper than a “broken build” or “unfair bosses / spongy enemies”.

Now that I think about it, he was able to hide his flaw by using comedy. Which obscures the lack of gameplay critic he gave. I found it funny that it’s just now that I realize that all this time I just like his jokes and not his gameplay critique haha

 

[ArthuriusMartyrius]

A lot of the games are art faggotry happened because they didn't understand what Ebert was really saying, is that real art is supposed to make you think about stuff and examine the human condition, not that they could tell a good story or have good graphics/music.

He was right, and over a decade after his death from cancer, he's still right. There is no subtlety or nuance in most of the games that are supposed to be "art". Papers, Please, Night in the Woods, The Last of Us and its sequel, and many others, these have the subtlety of a brick and cannot be interpreted by the viewer. I mentioned this in a different thread, while many MOVIES can be interpreted differently (which is of course Ebert's home turf), the game that comes closest is the original Deus Ex (not its sequels) and even then its a borderline case.

And Ebert was and still is full of crap. Mona Lisa doesn't make the audience think shit or reflect on the human condition in any particular manner. It's appreciated due to its (for the time period) technical complexity as well as the dumb decades-long debate about whether it was actually a self-portrait of Leonardo in drag.

I want the "video games are/are not art" garbage to fucking die already because all it has led to is a proliferation of pretentious faggotry in the video game developer space rather than a focus on being good entertainment with solid mechanics.

 

[The tired cat]

Anyone who takes Eberts world as gospel, I just wanna remind everyone that twat loved the movie "Knowing" with Nic Cage, which was the biggest bible jack off ever.

 

[Captain Syrup]

Anyone who takes Eberts world as gospel, I just wanna remind everyone that twat loved the movie "Knowing" with Nic Cage, which was the biggest bible jack off ever.

Ebert was a semi-swinging Catholic with a laundry list of hang-ups to prove it. Like Dunkey once said, critics bring their own baggage, and it's on you to separate their neuroses from your own opinion.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

A lot of the games are art faggotry happened because they didn't understand what Ebert was really saying, is that real art is supposed to make you think about stuff and examine the human condition, not that they could tell a good story or have good graphics/music.

He was right, and over a decade after his death from cancer, he's still right. There is no subtlety or nuance in most of the games that are supposed to be "art". Papers, Please, Night in the Woods, The Last of Us and its sequel, and many others, these have the subtlety of a brick and cannot be interpreted by the viewer. I mentioned this in a different thread, while many MOVIES can be interpreted differently (which is of course Ebert's home turf), the game that comes closest is the original Deus Ex (not its sequels) and even then its a borderline case.

Nah dude that's bullshit. Every thing can be said to make you think if you stare at it long enough. It's basically muh "Media Literacy" for art critics.

You know what is art when you see it. You don't need a fancy degree to recognise it. At most, some art can be appreciated mainly by people in specific situations, or people who realize the amount of effort and technique involved with it.

The debate is also pointless in the modern age where gaming is the last bastion of media that the average person gives a shit about. Art is mainly for money laundering, sculptures are a competition who can make the largest Nigger, films and TV are Expensive dog shit filled with ugly people, anime is fantasies on dying and being reborn as a gigachad, and literature are fujoshi fap bait.

 

[StacticShock]

I want the "video games are/are not art" garbage to fucking die already because all it has led to is a proliferation of pretentious faggotry in the video game developer space rather than a focus on being good entertainment with solid mechanics.

video games are kind of both, it uses the artistic medium to properly entertain the player with good mechanics and challenges, carefully measuring a potentiality of stress/reward of the player during playtime to ensure the time wasted is appropriate to enjoyment.
well, at least the games of the PS2 era, current ones? eehhh.

so anyone that says games are art is a faggot, a massive one.
and anyone that says games are not art but a entertainment product is another faggot, less massive than the other one but still massive.

the problem is hoping the sweet spot between entertainment product and artistic value can hit a target demographic well to ensure you still have a job at the end of the day but modern devs, pajeets in focus don't care about that, they only want to do their needful for themselves which is hitting approved by boardroom checklist development, not their potential players and fans, it's also why indies are hit/miss, never inbetween like the general slop shit from a AAA franchise because of the consistency that is preestablished like battlefield, this is where people like game designers or "the idea guy" comes in as they are supposed to find people from both extremities and tardwrangle them to try and hit a target demographic, this is why they are hated by both sides of it since they are too far up their own arseholes to see the product side of games.

something yathz himself can't comprehend because he does not want to as it shatters a specific view about this medium that he possesses, not that he is incapable of.

 

[Xarpho's Return]

Nah dude that's bullshit. Every thing can be said to make you think if you stare at it long enough. It's basically muh "Media Literacy" for art critics.

You know what is art when you see it. You don't need a fancy degree to recognise it. At most, some art can be appreciated mainly by people in specific situations, or people who realize the amount of effort and technique involved with it.

The debate is also pointless in the modern age where gaming is the last bastion of media that the average person gives a shit about. Art is mainly for money laundering, sculptures are a competition who can make the largest Nigger, films and TV are Expensive dog shit filled with ugly people, anime is fantasies on dying and being reborn as a gigachad, and literature are fujoshi fap bait.

When I say "Ebert was right" (and given the state of movies and TV shows these days he's probably spinning in his grave, his frame of reference is movies made before 2013) I'm not talking about that his words were 100% true and inarguable or that his argument couldn't be boiled down to intellectual snobbery, no one on the games-as-art side really got it either.

Coming back to Yatzhee, I think he was more of a spectacle / writing sort of person. I don’t know why he felt in love with video game in the first place, but even back on his older review he always criticize the ludo-narrative dissonance (I hope I use the term correctly) of the tension between story and games. He never really criticizes something more deeper than a “broken build” or “unfair bosses / spongy enemies”.

I know he hated JRPGs but I thought he personally disliked the genre (and its heavy overlap with weebshit) rather than questioning the obvious disconnect between gameplay and story, like the ol' "why Cloud couldn't just use a Phoenix Down on Aeris" chestnut.

The problem with Yahtzee is that he's never consistent in what he claims to like and dislike. There's examples in this thread I won't go over here but he loved DOOM for its mostly hands-off approach at the plot and then doubled down on that concept by defending the fact that a video game allows you to choose your investment in that story, yet at the same time, he worships "plot" games like whatever indie or AAA slop the rest of the game journalists are fawning over. Like any lobotomized game journo he worshipped Undertale but if you ignore the story it becomes a bullet hell game masquerading as an JRPG in one of the ugliest-looking games of the 2010s.

 

[Tommy John Surgery]

Is the ship actually sinking with this shilljob? At least, let them finish their actually funny D&D show

 

[StacticShock]

Is the ship actually sinking with this shilljob?

uhhh, i think it's a boat rocked situation, i can't really be bothered to watch the video but it was clear from day uno that the viewers tanked considerably.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Is the ship actually sinking with this shilljob? At least, let them finish their actually funny D&D show

Lol they are going under. They are at minimum 5K in the red, the begathon might get them a few months, but they are competing in an oversaturated market at a time that disposable income is getting lower and lower (and they don't really have anything to give). Yahtzee seems to be there purely out of stubbornness and his wife being the breadwinner.

 

[Coolio55]

Yahtzee seems to be there purely out of stubbornness and his wife being the breadwinner.

Oh boy! I can't wait for the Chzo Mythos reboot!
(Except he's already sort-of done that so NVM)
E: Oh boy! I can't wait for the second Rob Blanc reboot!
...unless the space game already does that.

 

[p1138]

Lol they are going under. They are at minimum 5K in the red, the begathon might get them a few months, but they are competing in an oversaturated market at a time that disposable income is getting lower and lower (and they don't really have anything to give). Yahtzee seems to be there purely out of stubbornness and his wife being the breadwinner.

I saw the part of the video where they claimed they hope to be profitable soon. Maybe stop wasting time paying people to produce garbage no one watches? It's been said before repeatedly in this thread, the only reason people are on their patreon or even subscribed to the channel is Yahtzee. And not even all of Yahtzee's videos make a decent amount of views but everything that isn't his shit can barely break 30k views a video, and hope they're going to get sponsors worth a shit?

Discovery Queue, a recent show of theirs that can't break 30k, 3/4 of the videos can't break 15k.
Adventure is Nigh, their stupid D&D series that hasn't broken 30k views in a year and is currently struggling for 20k.
Unpacked, it looks like a shitty news show that's late about things, can't break 30k.
Bytesized reviews. Short indie game reviews, that can't break 30k.
The Backdrop. Some shit about TV shows and movies, is struggling to break 20k views a video.
Design Delve, it's about game design. This actually makes 50-100k views a video when the topics seem interesting enough, sometimes far better. But if their channel wasn't flooded with garbage, they could take what is a reasonably successful show and run with it in addition to the Yahtzee content but that would make too much sense.

Just cut the 5 garbage shows no one is interested in, money problem solved. Hell it might actually help overall revenue simply by not bombarding their audience with crap that they're clearly not interested in.

 

[whatever I feel like]

A lot of the games are art faggotry happened because they didn't understand what Ebert was really saying, is that real art is supposed to make you think about stuff and examine the human condition, not that they could tell a good story or have good graphics/music.

He was right, and over a decade after his death from cancer, he's still right. There is no subtlety or nuance in most of the games that are supposed to be "art". Papers, Please, Night in the Woods, The Last of Us and its sequel, and many others, these have the subtlety of a brick and cannot be interpreted by the viewer. I mentioned this in a different thread, while many MOVIES can be interpreted differently (which is of course Ebert's home turf), the game that comes closest is the original Deus Ex (not its sequels) and even then its a borderline case.

Gamers just need to not give a fuck what other genre-creators think of them. When I hear film people (think Half in the Bag, for instance) talk about games its always the most boring, surface level shit imaginable. These people are why Mario has purposely looked the same for the last 25 years or why EA lost a lot of money merely by changing FIFA's name despite the game being the same as it ever was.

And yet gamers are no different. Ask them about film and tv and you'll get either whatever Netflix fed everyone this week or fucking Transformers and Ninja Turtles. Maybe that is why film-snobs don't respect you (and why you shouldn't respect them either.)

 

[Tommy John Surgery]

I saw the part of the video where they claimed they hope to be profitable soon. Maybe stop wasting time paying people to produce garbage no one watches? It's been said before repeatedly in this thread, the only reason people are on their patreon or even subscribed to the channel is Yahtze

A lot of them have been working with Youtube for years now and they somehow still don't know that:
1. Posting shorts on the same channel will annoy subscribers who have notifications on and will make them either turn it off or unsubscribe, reducing their average views. The same can be said for their usually non-Yahtzee podcast streams no one cares about.
2. This same principle is why the Youtube algorithm punishes channels which have many different 'shows' or video types unless the channel already has a devout fanbase who will click on most of them (they don't).
3. With all this information, they badly need to trim the fat to Yahtzee's shows and JM8's Design Delve. I do have a soft spot for the D&D show because it reminds me of real table dynamics I've seen while playing and I find it funny so I hope it stays because of sunk-cost and because if a TTRPG show hits, it can hit big (see: Critical Role, Dimension 20, or the less libshit Glass Cannon Network).

I have a feeling they keep most of the other shows as a masturbatory practice so Nick and co. can claim to be 'reputable game journos' trying to uplift game devs and the industry as a whole. While he sperged a bit, Frost was right: Nick Cucklandra should not be running a company.

 

[p1138]

A lot of them have been working with Youtube for years now and they somehow still don't know that:
1. Posting shorts on the same channel will annoy subscribers who have notifications on and will make them either turn it off or unsubscribe, reducing their average views. The same can be said for their usually non-Yahtzee podcast streams no one cares about.
2. This same principle is why the Youtube algorithm punishes channels which have many different 'shows' or video types unless the channel already has a devout fanbase who will click on most of them (they don't).
3. With all this information, they badly need to trim the fat to Yahtzee's shows and JM8's Design Delve. I do have a soft spot for the D&D show because it reminds me of real table dynamics I've seen while playing and I find it funny so I hope it stays because of sunk-cost and because if a TTRPG show hits, it can hit big (see: Critical Role, Dimension 20, or the less libshit Glass Cannon Network).

Sure, they wouldn't even need to eliminate all of the shows that don't do well. But adding a new show a month ago definitely wasn't the right move. Even cutting out just 4 of those worthless shows could allow design delve and the D&D show some breathing room.

I have a feeling they keep most of the other shows as a masturbatory practice so Nick and co. can claim to be 'reputable game journos' trying to uplift game devs and the industry as a whole. While he sperged a bit, Frost was right: Nick Cucklandra should not be running a company.

And it's amazing that he failed at The Escapist but they thought somehow trying the same thing with a different name would work. What happens when this Second Wind dumpster fire fails? Setup a kickstarter for a new channel called Third Shift where Yahtzee is still the main draw but it's flooded with content no one is interested in?

 

[StacticShock]

Discovery Queue, a recent show of theirs that can't break 30k, 3/4 of the videos can't break 15k.
Adventure is Nigh, their stupid D&D series that hasn't broken 30k views in a year and is currently struggling for 20k.
Unpacked, it looks like a shitty news show that's late about things, can't break 30k.
Bytesized reviews. Short indie game reviews, that can't break 30k.
The Backdrop. Some shit about TV shows and movies, is struggling to break 20k views a video.
Design Delve, it's about game design. This actually makes 50-100k views a video when the topics seem interesting enough, sometimes far better. But if their channel wasn't flooded with garbage, they could take what is a reasonably successful show and run with it in addition to the Yahtzee content but that would make too much sense.

Just cut the 5 garbage shows no one is interested in, money problem solved. Hell it might actually help overall revenue simply by not bombarding their audience with crap that they're clearly not interested in.

when you put it like that i get why they were so uppity about escapist since escapist was clearly not interested in losing money with shit no one cares about.

2. This same principle is why the Youtube algorithm punishes channels which have many different 'shows' or video types unless the channel already has a devout fanbase who will click on most of them (they don't).

even linus wasn't that dumb and moved his podcasts to another channel, as well as the channels focusing on the other members of his channel while keeping LTT about linus mainly and his fanbase is pretty devout.

 

[>IMPLYING]

I saw the part of the video where they claimed they hope to be profitable soon. Maybe stop wasting time paying people to produce garbage no one watches? It's been said before repeatedly in this thread, the only reason people are on their patreon or even subscribed to the channel is Yahtzee. And not even all of Yahtzee's videos make a decent amount of views but everything that isn't his shit can barely break 30k views a video, and hope they're going to get sponsors worth a shit?

Discovery Queue, a recent show of theirs that can't break 30k, 3/4 of the videos can't break 15k.
Adventure is Nigh, their stupid D&D series that hasn't broken 30k views in a year and is currently struggling for 20k.
Unpacked, it looks like a shitty news show that's late about things, can't break 30k.
Bytesized reviews. Short indie game reviews, that can't break 30k.
The Backdrop. Some shit about TV shows and movies, is struggling to break 20k views a video.
Design Delve, it's about game design. This actually makes 50-100k views a video when the topics seem interesting enough, sometimes far better. But if their channel wasn't flooded with garbage, they could take what is a reasonably successful show and run with it in addition to the Yahtzee content but that would make too much sense.

Just cut the 5 garbage shows no one is interested in, money problem solved. Hell it might actually help overall revenue simply by not bombarding their audience with crap that they're clearly not interested in.

It's like they wanted to speed-run the death of these quasi-networks like Machinima, Escapist, Fun Haus, Rooster Teeth, Screen Rant, Yogscast, TBFP, etcetera. These channels made their big break with one series/main personalities, then hoped to double dip on their audience by trying to get them to watch another series of theirs, which doesn't happen unless it features talent from the videos people are there actually watching — they established how you do this shit years ago but through ego or ignorance Second Wind just ignored precedent and reached the corporatised-stage of a dying YouTube channel in record time.

You introduce new people to the audience through the main series that gets views, who then (depending on if the person is actually funny or engaging) they might bother to follow into a new series of videos or back to that person's channel. Who in these videos make them worth watching?

 

[Rich Evans Ayypologist]

I mean, it's the old lesson playing out again: business isn't friendship and shouldn't pretend to be. Clearly, all the people there get along with each other well-enough, but the simple reality is that most of them have no draw and should be let go of. That's kindof the thing when the only skill you bring to the fore is "I have a personality," as opposed to "I know how to edit" or "I can create art assets" or "I can compose music."

It's definitely interesting to see the exact same series of mistakes playing out in the exact same way again, though. It suggests that the closer we get to capsizing, the more stupid shit we'll hear the Second Wind "cast" say out of one side of their mouth while they give tell-alls out of the other.