James Stephanie Sterling |OT| Thank God for the Jimquisition
- Thread starter TheEchosOfTheCyborg
- Start date
- OT
I'm glad Jim's voice is out there, and I even subscribe to his channel, but... yeah. I mentioned this in a previous Jim thread, but I find he frequently just snarls and snarks his way across the same points about the "triple-AAAAAAaaaAAA" industry he makes in every video. In some cases he just lapses into pure theatrical snark, without even really making an argument, or bringing any new insight to whatever he's talking about. Like if Randy Pitchford is in the news for some reason, you can bet Sterling will put out a video with a script that could have easily been repurposed from his LAST Pitchford video.
This can make him a little tedious to listen to at times - even when I'm agreeing with his basic point (as I often do) - but he'd hardly be the first extremely imperfect messenger of things people should nonetheless hear. And I'm sure it's difficult to justify a new video 52 weeks a year, so there's a lot of inevitable rehashing when righteous soapboxing is your niche.
Also, his comedy isn't for me at all (haha Boglins...?), but it can be mostly ignored if you just skip his intro segment and go right to the video essay.
Excessive whining helped get other youtubers and streamers deplatformed so there's precedent I guess.
Case in point of why a Jim Sterling megathread is like trying to row upstream without a paddle. Even with a singular megathread that is easily ignorable, his detractors STILL come in on the first page to moan about him.
I'm happy with either a megathread or multiple threads because the end result is always going to be the same. At least separate threads on different issues more easily differentiates the vastly different, but still important, talking points from one another.
Anyway:
ESTUS IS BESTUS
ESTUS IS BESTUS
Last edited:
What we're going to do is update titles so the thread title always reflects the latest opinion piece, as we are generally talking about one at a time. It'll be on the front page when people are talking about it anyway, but now without the first three pages bogged
(boglined?)
down by metacommentary. The OP and mods can also threadmark posts with links to important videos so it's easy to find the start of important discussions (do give a mod a shout if you think a threadmark is needed). Not quite the same, but I hope that helps.
Usually that's "whining" about them being bigots though isn't it? Not really applicable here.
I like Jim. I don't always agree with his views on some games, and yes, he tore down a few games I loved, but I think he does an important and needed job and I find him funny (most of the time, anyway).
With respect I think is is fine for his smaller videos but this just means that his videos about bigger issues and important topics are just going to get ignored when really they should be highlighted and seemingly all because some people don''t like the idea of a critic being more negative about aspects of the industry or certain games.
Does this now also mean that other content creators should receive their own OTs (I'm thinking dunkey, Girlfriend Reviews, Game Maker's Toolkit, Matthewmatosis, Joseph Anderson etc.)?
Last edited:
100% this, those people are the "KEEP POLITICS OUT OF MY VIDEO GAMES" crowd except instead of being bigots they just hate it when someone points out that their beloved toys are made in sweatshops.
Dear oh dear, what a beautiful meltdown this was, to think that Digital Homicide could have just swallowed up their pride and keep on releasing their asset flips on Steam, but they decided to self-destruct in an unprecedent succession of bad decissions.
That reminds me that the video that made me a Jim Sterling fan was A Steam Spite Story, the final speech to be precise
You say i am no king, and that's true! I am but a human, you are but humans, we born, we live, we will die one day
but here's the difference between you and i, mkay?
Now when people think of Jim Sterling, they think of Jim Sterling
When people think of your shitty, (never was able to understand this word) they think of Jim Sterling
You see, whatever meager, misery of a legacy you hoped to attain, it is redered now on to me
YOU belong to ME now
You're nothing but a trinket, but an ornament, to put on a shelf, next to (can't remember the name of this), next to the Slauthering Grounds guys. YOU.ARE.MINE
So i hope you enjoy that, because i'm Jim Fucking Sterling, son
You can't stop me, and if you have a problem with that, you're cordially invited to eat-my-p***y
I mean ok, in retrospective is kind of an assholic speech, but not only it fits perfectly his persona back then, it defines it, or at least it does for me.
In fact his persona has changed quite a bit since then, he's less of an impertinent, grandiose asshole and more of a cynic, angry, no-nonsense character, it has gradually changed along with his progression from dictator parody to what he is now.
I wanted to be this at one point, when i was getting into gaming press, but the industry was stronger than me.
Great way to ensure Jim's content ends up buried OP. Now like most OT's, this will end up buried and ignored.
Yeah exactly. Other people have been banned because they're pieces of shit, but if someone is popular, even if they're a piece of shit, there is generally some resistance to them being banned from a lot of users
There have been people trying to get Jim banned, people even tried to get Girlfriend Reviews banned, but those won't work because (unless further evidence arises to the contrary) those people are fine, they just rile people up for various reasons
Wait what? Who the hell wanted to ban Girlfriend Reviews? They're the most wholesome gaming channel on YouTube. Did someone get pissed because they are 'promoting heterosexuality' or some other bullshit reason?
It was literally because they made a joke about PewDiePie once, but that's a long story and I don't want to derail the thread
It seems to have stopped now and you only get the odd weird post in their threads
An OT is a good idea for his smaller videos and such. I do think his bigger jimquisitions should probably still get their own thread under the new news new thread concept.
This. Shitty practices within the industry don't need less exposure.
Bah! Big fan of Jim - even though I can disagree at times with his opinion on some games - crazy I know! But I don't like this thread. Why are we giving in to the whiny little fucks that shit up his threads? Their barely concealed motives for doing so should be punished not rewarded. Fuck them and their agendas for - not liking a game/company/industry figure/monetization that they do. I think that his politics and lifestyle choices also factor in - but they're too fucking chicken to admit that out loud. Not that they'll see this post - because they'll be ignoring this thread and will never comment on him again, right?
To be fair Jim is quite prolific, and we thought that a continually updated thread title would stop Jim weekly topics getting constantly derailed. Yes, people can ignore it, but we give people the tools to ignore topics they aren't interested in (rather than derail them) anyway.
Jim's topics often have news value, and to me that means they stay in gaming. This is less of a community and more a way of organising regular topical opinion pieces by one creator.
I'll raise these points with the rest of the staff though.
Yep, good idea this thread.
Don't care for him. But hold on a minute! He's absolutely necessary.
Of course it's the persona/content that I don't like. I've got nothing against him personally.
I have actually enjoyed his various podcasts over the years if not for him but for the other voices (dare I say talent? I'll say talent) he's aided and helped bring to the fore.
The best podcasts do this.
The best thing about this is I can share what I think on whatever ways he is wrong (......or "close to being right" - yes that sounds better) on probably a great many subjects, but still applaud him for bringing them up.
I don't know, I still want separate discussions for what he brings to the table (the most recent being the Avengers thread), but some of the more meaningful discussions about the man deserves a home of its own as well.
I don't know if there's a podcast currently, but do seek it out.
There's a remark from one of the recent Giant Bomb threads where the staff over there completely understand that there can and should be a place where audiences can talk about the content without necessarily wondering if the content creators are going to read it.
That's always stuck with me.
Don't care for him. But hold on a minute! He's absolutely necessary.
Of course it's the persona/content that I don't like. I've got nothing against him personally.
I have actually enjoyed his various podcasts over the years if not for him but for the other voices (dare I say talent? I'll say talent) he's aided and helped bring to the fore.
The best podcasts do this.
The best thing about this is I can share what I think on whatever ways he is wrong (......or "close to being right" - yes that sounds better) on probably a great many subjects, but still applaud him for bringing them up.
I don't know, I still want separate discussions for what he brings to the table (the most recent being the Avengers thread), but some of the more meaningful discussions about the man deserves a home of its own as well.
I don't know if there's a podcast currently, but do seek it out.
There's a remark from one of the recent Giant Bomb threads where the staff over there completely understand that there can and should be a place where audiences can talk about the content without necessarily wondering if the content creators are going to read it.
That's always stuck with me.
No, it really isn't, but some people act as if it is, in more than one thread i've seen people mentioning Jimquisition past aesthetics parodying nazi/dictator imaginery (Wich Jim adressed and changed appropiately) and even mentioning Jim's attitude about a decade ago or so (When he used to hold quite problematic opinions, he has addressed that more than once in his videos, and apologized properly)
Wait, what? Why?
The way i see it Jim reviews/ pressions should stay here or in review threads/Ot, but if its a report that would a thread if it was an article it should get its own thread as well.
Otherwise it feels like your quarantining someone because people don't like them. Negativity shouldn't cause for ban.
Otherwise it feels like your quarantining someone because people don't like them. Negativity shouldn't cause for ban.
One of the few voiced to remind us of the shitty practices in the gaming industry instead of accepting the new normal
and just to continue the PR/hype cycle like most others do.
and just to continue the PR/hype cycle like most others do.
Fucking lol at someone calling him a grifter in the Avengers thread. Like there aren't better ways to be earning money online than raging against the AAA/MTX machine.
I may not always agree with him or be in the right mindset to watch him, but thank god for Jim Sterling all the same.
I may not always agree with him or be in the right mindset to watch him, but thank god for Jim Sterling all the same.
They are probably going to end up in here, and covered by a thread title change to flag up the topic of the Jimquistion currently being discussed and a threadmark to archive it. However, if it's a vital news story Jim is breaking that extends way beyond his video, has other sources etc, I can see an argument for 'new news, new thread'. Obviously we don't want to bury vitally important stuff that can stand on its own. If it's something extremely important, then give us a shout.
His opinion pieces are going to stay in here for now though, covered by threadmarks and a title change. At least for now- let's see how this plays out in terms of facilitating discussion, we can always come back to it. I'm a fan of Jim's work myself and agree with those saying that he often covers important angles on things.
Last edited:
Well, the 1st page of that thread sure is something, not sure if i have the stomach to read it completely, but i get the gist of it.
Having watched Max Dood beat Avengers on stream earlier, where the game repeatedly dropped to sub 15fps in the final mission, and crashed to desktop right at the climax of the final boss fight even on PC hardware... I'm gonna say Jim was right on the money with his Avengers take.
Is this thread officially sponsored by the Cornflake Homunculus?
I'm also afraid of some of his content being ignored if sequestered to this thread. Like his videos that highlight abuse where he usually includes testimonies from folks he knows or have confided in him.
Jimpressions being in here is fine, but maybe Jimquisitions should still get their own thread.
I'm also afraid of some of his content being ignored if sequestered to this thread. Like his videos that highlight abuse where he usually includes testimonies from folks he knows or have confided in him.
Jimpressions being in here is fine, but maybe Jimquisitions should still get their own thread.
This is why i don't really like him. He raised a lot of pitchforks, which is okay and totally necessary to talk about the problems of the industry and no games or game company is perfect, but doesn't really try to come up with solutions. I stopped watching his videos not because he talk shit about things i love and realised he is right, i stopped because it's fucking depressing and instead of being more positive about the future, he don't talk what could ''they'' do to make it right, etc.
I know it's not the same thing but it just remind me of the Youtube channel CinemaSins. I know it started as a satire videos serie but now it became just negativity over negativity just for the sake of it. I much prefer the less well known CinemaWins, where another dude does completely the reverse of CinemaSins and highlight the good things in a movie HOWEVER, he is clearly really good at criticizing a movie, have an open mind and often talk about the downs of a film, like nobodies perfect.
OP
OP
Rewatched Jim's Avengers video again and there something I've thought about, For years, long before ERA was thing there was critique of Lootboxes and microtransactions (more so the latter nowadays) that their needed in order to support big updates and and new characters and the like and would you prefer to go back to expansions (or in Fighting games, having to buy the game again). I remember how people furiously defended Overwatch with this defence.
The thing is, yes? In the case of Fighting games, it feels like it was actually cheaper buy the game again compared the sheer cost and amount of DLC some of them have now and in the case of Street Fighter V, just cheaper to wait before the release and updated version with most of that free, same with GOTY editions of Warner Bros games or with games like Control which you can end up being screwed over if you bought the more expensive initial version. Also if going back to expansions meant the games were less grindy, less menu ridden and had in-game cosmetic rewards more often, then yes, I would near universally prefer that.
That also goes into the discussion of do all these games need to be constantly updated or live service based, the recent Avengers game seems to be an example where it would have been better as a game if it was a 10-20 hour single player game with classic expansion/DLC based updates then a live service one. But I'm meaning even further then that, do some games need to continue beyond the base games, should games be allowed to have natural end points like many movies and novels? Of course the issue is that Companies like Activision and Ubisoft don't want that... Or Hollywood in general to be honest, better to be open ended that also leads to why the loss of the smaller mid tier level games was a big one for allowing games like that.
The thing is, yes? In the case of Fighting games, it feels like it was actually cheaper buy the game again compared the sheer cost and amount of DLC some of them have now and in the case of Street Fighter V, just cheaper to wait before the release and updated version with most of that free, same with GOTY editions of Warner Bros games or with games like Control which you can end up being screwed over if you bought the more expensive initial version. Also if going back to expansions meant the games were less grindy, less menu ridden and had in-game cosmetic rewards more often, then yes, I would near universally prefer that.
That also goes into the discussion of do all these games need to be constantly updated or live service based, the recent Avengers game seems to be an example where it would have been better as a game if it was a 10-20 hour single player game with classic expansion/DLC based updates then a live service one. But I'm meaning even further then that, do some games need to continue beyond the base games, should games be allowed to have natural end points like many movies and novels? Of course the issue is that Companies like Activision and Ubisoft don't want that... Or Hollywood in general to be honest, better to be open ended that also leads to why the loss of the smaller mid tier level games was a big one for allowing games like that.
I approve of this thread AND his shtick
We can update the thread title if that helps garner discussion.
We can update the thread title if that helps garner discussion.
