IGN's review editor has gone insane over The Angry Joe Show "I have more youtube than you!"

[Teoskaven]

Actually, to be honest, some of Joe's reviews are not that bad as they might be, and he has made videos in the past with almost positive praises and no screaming in it. Also, he does point out what are the flaws in the games he reviews, and the character of Corporate Commander is both hilarious and ingenious.

The real problem is that Joe himself is a selfish prick that basically dictates his holy, higly restricted words and is intransigent (like giving 10/10 scores to Guild Wars II or the buggy mess that was Skyrim at launch), and he has been for so many years a strict Microsoft fanboy, reviewing only Xbox 360 and PC games while at the same time proclaming himself as a role model of the whole gaming community. Only recently he has started to open up a little to the other consoles since he bought a PS4 and an Ipad, but Nintendo is still a no-no word on his channel (and that's hilarious, considering how in one of his Top lists of January he hoped "that Nintendo will get up from their current problems with the WiiU", but since then he has done nothing to help -unless you can count a reference to Paper Mario, but that would be ridicolous-).

 

But you can check how Joe "doesn't care about money" from this fact: if you remember, every "strong" Youtuber who made a video about the Dead Space 3 demo when it came out (Game Grumps and PewDiePie for example) was payed by EA in order to promote it. Guess what? Joe too fits this group.

I'm sticking with Spoony, thanks.

 

 

As for IGN: like almost every other game journalism site, i'm not taking anything of what they say seriously or mature. Sites like that should be reserved for news, not reviews.

[Willsy]

I really can't blame Joe at all in this case, honestly. The IGN guy is the one randomly going apeshit and attacking him over a 0.1 decimal score, and most of his tweets aren't really anything more than just defending himself, aside from one or two kinda childish ones. Dan's?

 

 

Oh wow, that is just.....I wouldn't even expect this of 14 year olds. 10 year olds, no maybe 8 year olds. Wow, this is just crazy. Has the situation been resolved or is it still going on?

[Nepenthe]

The only thing Angry Joe is wrong on in this specific instance is insulting the guy if you're the type who believes that personal insults should never be slung (On Twitter and including an Internet personality, I don't particularly fucking care. I personally hate PR sentimentality). But all it takes is a visit to the video to see that the IGN dude has been mistaken. Joe actually shows a proper screenshot of the review Dan is talking about, but he seems to take his running commentary over the screenshot as specific indictment of IGN. But that is clearly untrue. This is what Joe says verbatim, even before the screenshot comes up: "I'm surprised this game is getting such high scores, yanno, at major review outlets: "Believe the hype!" "10 outta 10!" "9 outta 10!"...." He is talking specifically about review outlets as a whole. Unless he reedited and reuploaded the video since this has happened, then the Dan dude's mistaken even on his pedantic view that Joe "maliciously" misrepresented IGN and is thus far more in the wrong than Joe is.

[Badnik Mechanic]

And isn't Angry Joe the same guy who had a bitchfit over his Youtube partership not paying him enough or something? As though he makes 100% of his income from the thing?

 

Ok if we're actually going to go there lets at least get a few things clear.

 

Joe, like hundreds of youtube users is partnered with various media groups who agree and sign their users via contract.

 

That contract means that the partners can upload material to youtube and it doesn't have to pass through the usual moderation before it gets monotomisation put on it. The downside, you have to pay fees to both youtube and the media partner.

 

However, when YouTube changed it's policy regarding media groups, they had to classify their users as either partners or affiliates. 

 

Partners = can upload without checks.

 

Affiliates = can't upload without checks. (Basically, no benefit to being a member, but you still have to pay fees to your media group).

 

Media groups who had hundreds of people in their group are reported to have only given a handful of people partner status. Everyone else got affiliates. Joe was reported to be one of the people who got affiliate status. So no benefits, despite still having to pay his partner various fees.

 

Add on top of that youtube's retroactive copywrite claims against these people. You can quite understand how mad and upset they are. So I don't think it's really accurate to claim it was a 'bitchfit' when it's a very reasonable complaint to make. You signed up and are paying for certain benefits, then without any say in the matter you don't get those benefits any more despite a contract saying you should.

 

For more info,

 

As for the whole 100% of the income. I am under the impression that like many popular youtubers, he does in fact get all of the bulk of his income from his video series.

[Kaze no Klonoa]

I only use IGN for news now, their reviews are just bull. Injustice Gods Among Us got a lower score just BECAUSE of chaotic destruction (Reviewed by the person who did Sonic Lost World). Plant VS Zombies Garden Warfare's review said NOTHING bad at all, and yet it got a 7.8 for limited split screen? Wow IGN, way to go.

 

And this hasn't been news before: The Issue against Vince and cobanermani456 also happened on twitter with the argument on how biased Vince's review on Lost World was.

[Blue Wisp]

This whole argument gives me hints that the modern reviewers really need to change the 0.x system. Rounding up the scores is basically a necessity these days, the 0.1/0.2/0.3 scoring is reaaaaaally outdated.

[Tracker_TD]

Joe has the advantage of being a comedian too. Hyperbole is his job as a comedian. IGN is not a comedy network, like Blistered Thumbs and College Humor. Joe is the Colbert of video game journalism.

 

That would require Joe to have a grasp on somewhat intelligent humour. Which he doesn't.

[MegasonicZX]

Regarding the whole "should reviews use decimal scores", I'd like to say that SomecallmeJohnny done away with this system some time ago and yet people can still get the basic gist of "Should I buy this game or not" due to how informative his actual reviews are.

With John's reviews, it's not a matter of "what score will he give this game" but moreso "what does he have to say about this game," if that makes any sense.

Yeah, I really like johnny's reviews since unlike a good majority of reviews he actually goes into good detail on the games and looks at them in a non biased way all while being funny. If anything his reviews are pretty much the only ones that I would consider professional.

[Place]

I'd like to think that if either of these two gave the meekest shit about their credibility as entertainers, the entirety of this tantrum wouldn't have happened in the first place.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

Dan is going to lose his job if he's not careful.

[Willsy]

Dan is going to lose his job if he's not careful.

After this whole escapade, I wouldn't be surprised if he did.