Jump to content
The King of Hate Forums

lourat

Most Respected Patron
  • Content Count

    350
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

lourat last won the day on October 3 2015

lourat had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

96 Excellent

1 Follower

About lourat

  • Rank
    Full Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1663 profile views
  1. Not all pt content is equivalent though. The question is whether those pt videos you saw were being released on a digestible schedule or whether it was 9-odd parts per day every day.. I'm betting some will be those playthroughs that drag on for months or years over a single game.
  2. What about mine? The last post I made paid Phil a compliment--something Phil was just bemoaning people not doing a few pages ago--and apparently it was worthy of deletion? What reason did that fall under?
  3. Erm, you can turn a negative around into a positive. Just do the opposite of what people are complaining about and "You're doing X, Y and Z wrong, Phil!" becomes "You can do A, B, and C to improve, Phil!" It's all in what you make of it. I'd say 10% of the bitch/be negative is malicious, and 90% is well-meant. Well-fucking-meant. Why not extend an olive branch and concede that to be the case?
  4. I think part of the reason it takes too long is that he tries to cram too much in there. He doesn't seem good at assessing the varying value of his content and ruthlessly prioritising. I think some of his 'best of' series ended up suffering the same problem of being too much of a time-sink to watch (the longest went on for hours, as a whole series), which defeats the whole purpose of doing it if the purpose is to reach out to people on a tight schedule who want something digestible. This is why I think it didn't get the views he had hoped for either. I say be brutal, make it no more than five minutes, and then there's something left worth watching in the full pt.
  5. I wonder where the world's smartest tech brains work at, because it sure isn't google. (Government ass-lickers on the other hand...) Anyway, if what you say is true then Phil's proposition of starting up a new channel for edited content falls right in line with it.
  6. Not a content regurgitator, but I like you as much as you agree with the sentiments in this satire.
  7. Ouch. This is one of those occasions where I don't realise how much I appreciate someone until the risk of them disappearing presents itself... I didn't religiously follow his content, but when he puts out a good opinion piece, he puts out a damn well articulated opinion piece (even if I don't agree with it). The idea of him dying hurts as much as Robin Williams death... ok let's not speak of it like it's already happened though and focus on the positive. People have defied medical predictions before. The guy is a juggernaught. I could mention negative points about him, but they're so superfluous and minor in the face of everything else. Truly a force for good in gaming. Whilst there is no cure for cancer, there are preventitive, anti-carcinogenic medicinal substances you can take and I hope he researches into that to prolong his life and support his health as much as possible, having a meticulous, squeaky clean diet and lifestyle. This is the age of information and the internet can give you what you need to take your health into your own hands if you know how to look.
  8. I don't see the point in mounting a defense about this. You can defend it, but that's not the point. People are going to feel like they were insulted and when there is a trickle of negative word through the grapevine that this guy might be an asshole, it's enough to push their opinion one way versus another. Because you know what's also human? Reacting impulsively and not seeing the bigger picture--i.e. they're not going to see 'Phil had a bad day', they're just going to see 'Phil insulted X group of people and I am one of them and so I feel insulted, PLUS I hear a lot of negative things about him'. I'm just saying be cognizant of it, because you can't change people but can change how you behave... *EDIT Also I realise you thought I was talking about profanity; I was refering to slipping in insults against people (see the link I referenced). I don't know if he's venting or what, but many times I've thought Phil wrote what would be a good post, if only he hadn't closed it with a sentence calling people participating in the thread idiots or something. It adds nothing except a spirit of meanness. I bet if Phil made a conscious resolution to never insult people (heck, just as an experiment), he may be surprised to find just how often he does it.
  9. Phil, you may want to consider dropping the inflammatory language. I mean things like this. Even if(when) justified in your attacks, you aren't specific enough about who you're talking about--when you fire shots, it's with a machine gun while pirouetting on one toe. See @TheBiz 's post for an example of someone caught by a stray 'bullet'. You make enemies where you could have allies instead. Your communication style makes me wonder if you want to create rancor in people.
  10. If Phil _really_ wants to get a representative sample when researching what his viewers want, he should make a dedicated video on his main channel saying 'POLL' in capital letters and providing a link. (Incidentally I recommend pollmill.com for making elaborate polls.)
  11. I always felt it should be the other way around: have montages take over the main channel exclusively and at the end he points out which channel to go to for the raw footage. People's inboxes are still locked on and they're more likely to check out a montage out of curiosity if they aren't buried under an avalanche of everything else.
  12. It's interesting to me that people offer Phil so much unsolicited advice, when to my recollection (correct me if I'm wrong) he's never sought out advice from anyone on how to run his business. He may complain, but I've never seen him go "Guy's, what should I do?" Just the opposite. What they want is for the person to care, and nothing says you don't care more than embracing what is said about you. Being able to laugh at yourself is empowering. (Not that I'm saying it's easy).
  13. Maybe Phil will finally try it now it's on consoles?
  14. The subjective part is in the standard of measurement. For instance, I think Half-life 2 surpasses Half-life 1 in terms of game mechanics and immersive-sim attributes. For someone who places a value on such things, Half-life 2 may be ranked higher than Half-life 1. But I much prefer the first game, and can itemize a lot of reasons why, although it ultimately comes down to how it comes together as a whole package and work of art. I can see how, if I were simply a different person with different tastes, I would prefer Half-life 2, because I can name things that it does better that I don't consider as important. But I cannot provide a logical reason why one should consider one set of qualities more important than another. That's the human element and it's unavoidable, no matter whether you're a professional critic or not. I suppose the nearest thing one could do in the effort to be impartial and professional would be to imagine the highest rating I could give it if I were somebody else, but that's kind of getting a bit silly...
  15. Well that's because it isn't reasoning. I rate with my heart and mind and I think any reviewer who is human has to. If I were to explain my thought process in words, it would look something like asking: how much enjoyment did I get out of this? How fond is my memory of it? How long did that enjoyment last? And lastly, how well does it stand on more objective, measurable qualities? I then try and average out. (Think of the heart as the tie-breaker, when you can't decide which game you think is better.) But actually, I don't do anything so formal, but it's the nearest thing to that. Listening to my gut feeling, I can easily place many video games a teensy bit ahead of one another; I couldn't necessarily tell you how or why (although I might be able to), since the subconscious is a lot faster than one can articulate what it's doing unless you slow it down and think about it. In some cases I even rate a game ahead of another but in my more personal score the positions are swapped, simply because of some very personal quality that I place value on but can't justify why anyone else must feel the same way. Conversely I've also sometimes said of a game, "It's a good game, but it doesn't resonate with me" or "I can see why others like it".
×
×
  • Create New...