I did love that one. Also incredibly partial to his review on gaming webcomics. I also think his written word extra punctuation feature can also be quite good.

http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/993/993914p1.html

Seriously. IGN is the worst thing to ever happen to gaming. This is the laziest review I have ever fucking read in my life, no actual criticism at all, other than "it's old so it sucks", which pretty much describes most "professional" reviews of old games now that I think about it.

Wow, you're right. Terrible.

That "review" just barely describes the gameplay in a very half assed way while leaving out many details, doesn't even try to address a single actual criticism, no analysis of how good or bad of a port it is, no attempt to provide context of any kind, condescending generalizations made about people who do like the game, 4 paragraphs that teach you absolutely nothing about the game and fail to even offer you a perspective, incredibly robotic writing with nary a shred of nuance.

Essentially this is every IGN review ever, condensed into it's most basic form.

What do you guys think of Angry Joe? His reviews tend to get me excited about games.

Meh I guess he's not as bad as other people on TGWTG but the whole angry gamer shtick is by far one of the worst internet trends I can think of. The only person who has ever made it work is AVGN, because he makes it work within the context of his manchild character, and he knows how to build the anger up convincingly and make you feel the same fustrations he feels. When anyone else does it it always comes off as forced, awkward, random and obnoxious.

The really bad ones act as if they have tourettes or bipolar disorder, and in some cases they probably do.

I think Blockbuster Buster is THE worst when it comes to that.

umm, boobs, this is a description of you...

X-Play has been canceled. And nothing of value was lost.

G4 is rebranding itself the Esquire Channel. Who didn't see that coming?

"Xenoblade Chronicles isn't great because of Nintendo's graphical limitations. It would be so much better on PS3 on Xbox360."

DIE OF FUCKING AIDS

I'm so tired of that fanboy shit.

Some people still need to watch this.

Everything he says is on point, except how many people unintentionally use the word "graphics" in place of "aesthetics"?

Well most people realize graphics mean detail, but most people including every fucking video game reviewer in existence also confuse having more detail with looking good.

One of the trillions of reasons video game criticism is such an utter failure and a joke is that critics never talk about aesthetics (either visual or audible).

If a game has great aesthetics but dated graphics, video game critics will always ignore the aesthetics and just say the graphics are bad and vice versa if a game has shit aesthetics but high fidelity graphics they ignore aesthetics and say the graphics are great. The implication always being that having high fidelity graphics is the only way for a game to look good.

Understanding aesthetics is vital to criticism of any medium and these dipshits can't even fucking grasp such a simple concept.

A monkey could do a better job. No hyperbole.

Which is again why Yahtzee is pretty good. He points out that just having better graphics isn't an end in itself and they often end up looking bad when technology improves latter if you put no effort into real visual design. A great example of a game that doesn't have fantastic graphics but awesome aesthetic design is Legend of Zelda Windwaker. It's absolutely wonderful and doesn't look dated at all because it has realy character and spark to it.