Jim Sterling Under Attack After Giving New Zelda a 7/10

[IMPress Polly]

*sighs* Here we go again!

Anyone who watches online game review videos for long will notice a pattern: the higher the score the reviewer gives just about any game, the higher their video's up-vote meter will be...and vice versa. Gamers like to see positive reviews of the games they already planned on buying, and perhaps even pre-bought, long in advance of possessing any non-propaganda analysis thereof. (Always a brilliant move.) Professional reviewers therefore know which games they have to score higher than others by which are new installments of long-running franchises with established, dedicated fan bases. To this end, almost all reviewers knew that frustrated Nintendo fans needed a win and gave The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild a perfect 10, often going so far as to describe it as "the best game Nintendo has ever made", etc. One reviewer on Metacritic, Jim Sterling (you know: "Jimquisition"), had the audacity to break the mold and score the game a 7 out of 10, indicating that he felt it was good instead of perfect, which brought the game's average score on Metacritic down from 98 all the way to 97. Now his site is down after being cyber mobbed (as in hacked, hijacked, etc.) by angry Legend of Zelda fans. It has now been taken down twice since the review was posted.

To give you an example of the mentality involved, a straw poll was even created on the subject of, and I quote, "Should the Fat, SJW, Deceitful, Attention-Seeking, Japanophobic, Cuckolded, Thrush-infected **** that is Jim Sterling be Lynched by a Mob of Rightful Believers in Zelda?" Other Zelda fans accuse Sterling's score as constituting "clickbait," which makes no sense as his site isn't monetized in any way. My point is that there's not an awful lot of rationality to the fans' motivations.

I've not yet finished the game myself, but up to where I am now in it, my impression is that it is indeed imperfect. I'd personally score it an 8 out of 10, as I feel the shift into the survival genre makes Breath of the Wild an above-average adventure game, but that it's nonetheless bogged down by tired, sexist tropes (Nintendo's continued dependence on damsel in distress scenarios feels more than a little dated at this point), a weak, self-serving pro-tech theme, and indeed, as Jim has suggested, far too many arbitrary irritations that serve to remind you that you're definitely playing a game, preventing the full immersion into the experience that the new survival elements otherwise help to foster. Whatever you think of the game though, this kind of behavior on the part of the gamer community needs to stop because it disincentivizes game critics from even trying to give you their honest opinions.

[nathanbforrest45]

Who was picked on "The Bachelor" last night?

[IMPress Polly]

Thanks for that constructive reply.

[The Xl]

Fanboys gonna fanboy.

[nathanbforrest45]

Thanks for that constructive reply.

You are quite welcome. Its about as pertinent as your little post to begin with.

[CreepyOldDude]

It never used to be this way. Unfortunately, my beloved internet, that I thought would broaden everyone's experience, seems to be infested with dipwads.

[CreepyOldDude]

You are quite welcome. Its about as pertinent as your little post to begin with.

Out of morbid curiosity, in what way was the top post not pertinent to the top post?

[Captain Obvious]

I don't follow video games much, at all in fact but I do know that these "reviews" can get kind of controversial. It's a whole subculture that I'm really not interested in.

But... for the record, I played the original Zelda when it was first released.

Bombs, boomerangs and a big pig looking dude at the end.

[IMPress Polly]

Okay, the site is back up now, so here's Jim Sterling's Breath of the Wild review itself:

Open Worlds, Closed Minds

See if you really think this level of controversy over it is merited.

CreepyOldDude wrote:
It never used to be this way. Unfortunately, my beloved internet, that I thought would broaden everyone's experience, seems to be infested with dipwads.

I don't think it has to be this way. We as a society just have to impose some real consequences for things like hijacking someone else's web site and issuing death threats online. So long as nothing concrete happens as a result of even the most aggressive online behavior, many people will feel entitled to quite literally do as they wish to anyone they see fit.