Pretty sure its not just a me thing either with trying to retain info on long rambley video essays. I know this because before I wrote the Anderson response I would quiz people in discord about it as soon as they were done watching it and noone could recall any single detail, moment or topic other than general ideas of what he thought he felt about ER despite it just being what they felt about ER and had imprinted that onto his video. Ex. He had a couple problems with the game but overall liked it. Name one thing he liked about ER. Uhhhh. Honestly i would recommend trying to write your own summary at the end of a long form video essay and see how much you actually remember, especially to compare that to a second watch.
MauLer doesn't say, or act like he's the “only correct critic,” he complains when specific other critics hide behind subjectivity when making claims that are provably wrong. Otherwise he wouldn't bother talking to other critics.
@@leadfaun Sorry I guess I should elaborate on my drunken ranting. MauLer brands his form of of "objective review" as The Robot and labels all other critics besides his friends as "traditional subjective reviewers" to make himself seem special despite him spending 90% of his videos summarizing a movie franchise and then interspersing that with him delivering his subjective opinions on superficial plot points and dialogue by describing what happens in an exasperated voice or sighing really heavily so that people can just guess what he thinks about what he is showing on screen. He (subjectively) believes that airtight plot and script matter above all other metrics to value movies and blows smoke up people's asses to try and make them believe that this is the sole important thing that makes a movie good and that everyone must agree on it because it is somehow the objective metric. As a result of this he avoids ever considering any deeper interpretations, metaphorical meaning, or social commentary, you know, the stuff that makes art analysis interesting. This is part of a broad anti-intellectualism trend of cinema review and criticism a la Cinema Cins and countless others that try to rebrand their lazy ignorance and refusal to engage with art as the "objective true way to view a film." This type of vapid bullshit can get you by with general audience for dumb fun summer blockbusters like Marvel movies but the format becomes laughable if you would ever try and use it on a movie that demands the audience engage with it and form their own interpretation.
@@leadfaun I should add that my movie commentaries are just as shitty though but I like to think I'm funny. They may be just as shitty in effort but at least they're short and for humor rather than cumbersome 9 hour long epics meant to seriously evaluate the worth of a movie.
@@NotLoopine I don’t agree. He doesn’t think anyone can be completely objective, and he talks about themes and metaphors and subtext. Maybe not *as much* his rage videos, but that’s obviously not the point.
@@leadfaun eh fair enough. It's been years since all the objectivity arguments so maybe he's changed his mind since then. I know he flip flopped on it a bit and did some criticism where subjective and some were objective, just that there wasn't really a way to discern between them often. My opinion of MauLer is basically that I don't enjoy his content at all and he feels more like a drama youtuber to me with EFAP, seeking out his critics for his furry friends to call autistic r*t*rds and such. Calling Anderson a massive F slur and then making a big deal about taking back his apology is still such just a lunatic thing to do. I have the impression that he's kind of a jerk.
speaking of bloodborne, there's an excellent video called Visceral Femininity: A Bloodborne Video Essay by Honey Bat that explores how bloodborne deals with more feminine themes like birth and etc, and idk about you but I would much rather listen to her opinions on the matter than some random dude's
@@NotLoopine Had to check the video again cuz it's been a while, but from the video's own intro (I'm paraprahsing here): Bloodborne is game that focuses on alot of elements of feminine biology that a lot of dudes are not confotable talking about, such as menstruation, pregnancy, birth and sexuality. In the video she takes a closer look at four topics: Blood, lunar cicles, babies and gods
I think about the fact that Joe is embarrassed by the idea of giving praise to things. I think he actually struggles with being honest about having positive feelings about something. Like some fear of having a vulnerable opinion.
I don't think MauLer's problem is video essay length. Everybody does the "long man bad" thought terminating cliche when they defend him, but truly, I think what people are picking up on is that the videos are unfocused. He spends a lot of time just candidly remarking on stuff in ways that aren't insightful and in some cases actively detrimental to building understanding. Objectivity misconceptions aside, I think length doesn't necessarily equal thorough critique, a lack of which begins to feel apparent as a video drags on, so that's what most people point to.
Have to disagree here. He spends a lot of time in his videos bringing the focus back to the point that he's making in any given section of his videos. Some of his old videos definitely could use more focus, but he re-drafts his scripts multiple times and if you listen to any of his livestreams or EFAP he explicitly says that he cuts or re-drafts *TO* keep focus. I feel like a really long critique would have to be thorough, though. It doesn't mean the critic doesn't get things wrong, but if they analyze every inch of a game or movie, it would be pretty long, no? For most people, they probably just aren't used to long form videos, I know I wasn't. I would watch his videos and realize after thirty minutes that I hadn't been paying attention. Of course now I have the opposite problem where if there is a short video that doesn't explain every facet of its point in detail, I feel like I didn't understand the video, but I feel like that's my shortcoming, not the video's. I have listened to MauLer's explanation of objectivity in art and its so thorough and logical, not to mention his debate with Just Write, that he has thoroughly convinced me. I ask not to own you or prove anything, I just want to clarify, but what do you think MauLer means by objectivity? Because alot of people have accused him of being an Ayn Rand Objectivist, which he does not believe in at all.
I'm personally not a fan of MauLer, and I gladly forgot most of what I've seen of him, but I feel that meandering on the same points over and over is a problem on some of his video analysis. Lots of youtubers have this big fixation on bloat, to the point writter's editor could make a lot of money trimming the fat on those videos and making their wording more professional.
@enman009 MauLer redrafts his scripts multiple times. I'm absolutely sure he trims it down in the process. You definitely did forget about what you've seen of him. If his videos aren't your cup of tea, that's fine, but it is another thing to say he "meanders" or his videos are "bloated".
Hey Chariot, thanks for the thoughtful comment as always. I agree with you and I actually just wrote another comment elaborating on why I dislike MauLer's content. It's in my pinned comment replies but I'll just repost it here to save you some scrolling. Cheers. Sorry I guess I should elaborate on my drunken ranting. MauLer brands his form of of "objective review" as The Robot and labels all other critics besides his friends as "traditional subjective reviewers" to make himself seem special despite him spending 90% of his videos summarizing a movie franchise and then interspersing that with him delivering his subjective opinions on superficial plot points and dialogue by describing what happens in an exasperated voice or sighing really heavily so that people can just guess what he thinks about what he is showing on screen. He (subjectively) believes that airtight plot and script matter above all other metrics to value movies and blows smoke up people's asses to try and make them believe that this is the sole important thing that makes a movie good and that everyone must agree on it because it is somehow the objective metric. As a result of this he avoids ever considering any deeper interpretations, metaphorical meaning, or social commentary, you know, the stuff that makes art analysis interesting. This is part of a broad anti-intellectualism trend of cinema review and criticism a la Cinema Cins and countless others that try to rebrand their lazy ignorance and refusal to engage with art as the "objective true way to view a film." This type of vapid bullshit can get you by with general audience for dumb fun summer blockbusters like Marvel movies but the format becomes laughable if you would ever try and use it on a movie that demands the audience engage with it and form their own interpretation. My movie commentaries are just as shitty in effort but at least they're short and for humor rather than a cumbersome 9 hour long epic meant to seriously evaluate the worth of a movie.
@NotLoopine Bro, there's so much wrong here. A very good portion of MauLers videos are dedicated to themes and social commentary. You're just wrong about him not caring about meaning and social commentary. I know everyone likes to say that he doesn't care about themes or meaning in art because of his Last Jedi review, but if you actually watch the video he says that the theme doesn't even agree with itself in the movie, not that themes are bad. Its funny how you talk about how art is subjective and that MauLer doesn't engage with meaningful themes, but then call Marvel movies "dumb fun summer blockbusters", as if there are not very meaningful and good themes in movies like Spiderman, Iron Man, Avengers. You're just a hypocrite. You decided that you aren't supposed to like MauLer, even though you guys would agree on a hell of a lot if you actually talked to him. I watched your video, and even though I didn't agree with everything, it's a well-done video. But this comment is not only obnoxious but wrong and woefully closed-minded. I sincerely hope that if EFAP every covers this video that you go on and talk to MauLer so you can understand his actual point of view, and also maybe come to agreement/disagreement without the uncharitable character you have towards him. I subscribed to you, and I'm not going to unsub or anything, but please dear God don't lambast someone over things you don't understand.
Joseph just released a video saying he like Lies of P bosses, this guy doesn't make any sense, he don't want to learn boss patterns and moveset in Elden Ring but he like learning how to parry every single ultra delayed attack with instant release and long combo of every single enemy in Lies of P
That's funny because you'd think someone like Anderson would have a problem with LoP Bosses for *Allegedly* the same reasons he and others take issue with ER Bosses.
It's probably fair of Anderson to like LoP bosses better than ER if he prefers a certain kind of combat loop, but it does feel like his ER (and DS3) critique suffers from not really being able to take a broader view of what's actually happening even in his own clips. In a sense, him liking Lies of P is the thing that makes the most sense of his Elden Ring views, because Elden Ring would have to be a different game in order for him to grasp it, because he didn't expand his mindset.
@@BBQcheese What got me so mad is that Joseph literally did what I hate about critics: Saying that something is bad in one game and then saying is great in other. Or good and then bad, whatever He chosed to use stupid takes with ER but he has said things like "The quality never falls" or him just praising things that are worse than they were in Fromsoft games. It just feels like he wants to troll everyone for half of the video, and AFTER THAT he starts making good points.
@@BBQcheese Also, I don't really agree with what you said for LoP bosses. Sure, the are delays that work like they do in ER and are actually good for the boss design and his combat, but some delays are just stupid and aren't well telegraphed to learn them. LoP was an easier game than almost any souls game I've played and the majority of the bosses (not all of them) made me mad because of attacks that need 6 seconds to land while having 3 frame animations. Learning how to parry some of Simon Manus attacks was awful because of this, specially some that look ALMOST the same but have totally different timings
Music and film criticism, while not completely devoid from these problems (eg: Nostalgia Critic's The Wall) I feel their video essays are more nuanced and mature, often far from these issues you mentioned. Folding Ideas, Middle 8 and even Nerdwritter are fantastic channels that, even when you disagree with their opinions, give you enough impartial information so you also come up with your own conclusions; not to mention the fact that their comment sections allow for a vast array of comments, expanding or openly disagreeing with the video's topic with lots of respect. Gaming criticism is so fixated on "I like/dislike, this is good/bad" with little nuance for what the piece is trying to convey or what topic you can tackle with that. DJ Peach Cobbler's video on House of The Dragon is a fantastic example of a video analysis, no indulgence of "this is good/bad" for 3 hours.
Random Film Talk did an episode by episode(with one extra for final autopsy) critical review of Rings of power, and those videos are so well organized and detailed that I don't mind spending 13 hours watching from time to time.
The best review of a game: give it to Ongbal. If he can make beautiful videos, the game is good. No need to hear his voice, there's a finer form of expression beyond language.
I personally believe that criticism doesnt have to be a bad thing; completely the oposite, a good criticism could perfectly lead to the developers doing better on their next project and perfecting it. The issue is that everybody calls all their BS on "criticism". I want to recall the two complete opposites examples you said; Mauler and JA. One is is a great overanalisis that can lead to a lot of worthless cherrypicking a lot of times, on an attempt to be objective, a lot of value gets sadly diluded by this, although I perfer it to the latter example. The reason why I despise so much Joseph Anderson critiques is because the attempt of making a first impression video a real critique. If you do that, thats not valid criticism, thats an opinion, mostly innacurate for not knowing how the game works. A valid criticism is to point out where a game has room for improvement, while being respectful with the work they made. Phrases like "they went lazy" or "they dropped the ball" are straight up unprofessional, and its clearly dissapoints me that channels with 500k+ subs still say that.
This is a bit late, but I believe Manley Reviews is an S Tier reviewer, mainly because he does an excellent arguments without sidetracking. Even when you disagree on something, you see where he's coming from.
@@enman009 I actually Saw a Channel called Domo3000 (a very underrated Channel) which responded very well to at least Mauler critique to DS2. You might be surprised how many disingenous Some arguments of Mauler were on that critique. Apart of that, yes, I feel that otherwise his critiques on less complex games like Outlasts are overall way better informed.
@@JoseViktor4099 Oh, I saw all parts of his response. Glad someone finally did a response to Mauler; his videos were terrible and made in bad faith. And this comes from someone that has DS2 as one of his least favorite Soulsborne games.
Calling developers lazy is in and of its self a lazy argument. There is probably a reason why some parts of a game were under developed, more than likely time and the fact the studio needed to allocate teams to more important parts of the game. Devs aren't lazy. They work ungodly hours to make games. Its always obnoxious coming from a guy who wants us to applaud him for sitting down playing games for a living.
I know this video is mad old, but check out f.d. Signifier. He’s the only long form video essayist I’m able to sit down with, and I wonder how his long got content would seem to you
Maulers multiverse of madness video goes through things with time stamps and is actually organized. Its one of his most recent ones and he also goes into themes of the movie too at the end after going through the plot.
Matt never said that though... He was explaining idea of themes and demonic imagery using Demon Souls and Bloodborne. He never said anything about rape or problematic artists. You can watch his "Microvideos 2", where he talks about it. The point of that segment was to show in how many ways you can think about media, even if art piece was never about that. Like how people whenever they met something they dont understand immediately try to give it some sort of meaning calling it a demon or an alien. Basically making unknown less scary. The control thing, I think he meant his "Extrinsic Motivation" video, where Matt explained how games can design motivators inside the game. Which again, fine if you dont like it, but dont call it stupid. If you dont care about that topic, it doesnt make it stupid or pointless. Dude did him very dirty... He might be really critical and cold, but he does love games and expresses it by giving new perspectives to his viewers. I understand that not everybody needs those type of perspectives, but at least Matt does a better job to deliever interesting views on game design, especially compared to Joseph Anderson who just hates games and fun overall and just presents his subjective hate like its an objective fact. Matt also criticised himself in "Metamicrovideos" trying again give new perspectives on things rather than push his opinions on others. Im not saying that his videos are perfect, but at least he's self aware of himself compared to some other people who just hate something and call it "objectively shit" and then avoid critique from others. Im fine with people that dont like videos of other people, but straight up lying about others to make them look bad is very shitty thing to do. P.S. Im not an english speaker, so apologies for any grammar mistakes.
I think that's exactly the problem with long-form videos like that, they're done in such a way that you just nod-off to them and barely remember anything about them OR they don't organise/timestamp or research it properly. (Usually both) I'd say if you're going to do something like that, at least have the decency to research, organise it properly, and ofc have proper timestamps. And at the very least make it fun to watch as well and not a boring slog! Some videos/creators actually do that at the very least, and can occasionally be nice to sit down with a Hot Beverage & Relax to in order to kill some time. Or to just have on as Background Noise like a Podcast. (Heck I've even put your ER video on, sometime even just in the background, on some occasions ngl) But the vast majority aren't even like that, and are usually best avoided...
I like Noah, he gets a little political now and then unfortunately. But It is nice that in a world of short form garbage he’s got the balls to make a video with real girth.
@@andrewkelly1337 Yes that's true, but unlike IDK MauLer I've never thought that Noah was artificially inflating the length of his videos. Plus it's easy to go on and on about trash you don't like, but Noah only makes videos about games he actually enjoys, for the most part.
"BLOODBORNE SAYS WOMEN AND PREGNANCY IS BAD, ALSO RAPE" I really can't stand that shit. Same thing happened to me when I was watching a Petscop video. Bro had to Luffy arm stretch to compare themes to fascism, so he could throw up a pic of Donald Trump. 😭
Matt never said that though... He was explaining idea of themes and demonic imagery using Demon Souls and Bloodborne. He never said anything about rape or problematic artists. You can watch his "Microvideos 2", where he talks about it. The point of that segment was to show in how many ways you can think about media, even if art piece was never about that. Like how people whenever they met something they dont understand immediately try to give it some sort of meaning calling it a demon or an alien. Basically making unknown less scary. The control thing, I think he meant his "Extrinsic Motivation" video, where Matt explained how games can design motivators inside the game. Which again fine if you dont like it, but dont call stupid. If you dont care, then just dont watch it. Dude did him very dirty... He might be really critical and cold, but he does love games and expresses it by giving new perspectives to his viewers. I understand that not everybody needs those type of perspectives, but at least Matt does a better job to deliever interesting views on game design, especially compared to Joseph Anderson who just hates games and fun overall and just presents his subjective hate like its an objective fact. Matt also criticised himself in "Metamicrovideos" trying again give new perspectives on things rather than push his opinions on others. Im not saying that his videos are perfect, but at least he's self aware of himself compared to some other people who just hate something and call it "objectively shit" and then avoid critique from others. Im fine with people that dont like videos of other people, but straight up lying about others to make them look bad is very shitty. P.S. Im not an english speaker, so apologies for any grammar mistakes.
I enjoy noah gervais, he doesn't hammer the same point home for 5 hours. His videos do seem to have ideas that he wants to convey. There's just a shitload of them. Joseph though, Jesus wept, I feel like that guy is just obsessed with the smell of his own farts. This video seems to come across as "long form bad hurr durr". Like with anything, there good and bad examples.
I think it’s some cases critics have a huge impact on art. Some objectively bad low effort art has became really popular and sought after simply because a few critics (so called “tastemakers”) sad it’s good. That art can became huge.
I watched all 9 parts of mauler’s hbomberguy response video (hell on earth) and the only thingI remember is that he said that ds2 vanilla had just as much enemy clutter as scholar. (lol)
I stopped watching in the second one when he wasn't able to discern npc invaders from real people and after he complained about the inconsistency of backstabbing while trying to backstab someone in full jester's set 🤦♂️
@victorprati7908 that video is close to 2 hours long if I remember correctly, and those points are specifically like 20 minutes apart, not to mention the rest of the points in the video. You just have an intuitional dislike of him that makes you cherry pick things that he gets wrong.
@@visperad541 bs! I've never heard of that guy up to that point and I found the first video kind of whatever because I gave him the benefit of the doubt but it became unbearable in the second one. There has being ages I've watched it but if anything that left a imprint in my head for sure is that his take was very bad up to that point overall. Now that I think about it I'm planning into put myself through the whole thing just to confirm if your argument find some moments of veracity or if what you said about my view is straight up bs.
Pretty sure its not just a me thing either with trying to retain info on long rambley video essays. I know this because before I wrote the Anderson response I would quiz people in discord about it as soon as they were done watching it and noone could recall any single detail, moment or topic other than general ideas of what he thought he felt about ER despite it just being what they felt about ER and had imprinted that onto his video.
Ex. He had a couple problems with the game but overall liked it.
Name one thing he liked about ER.
Uhhhh.
Honestly i would recommend trying to write your own summary at the end of a long form video essay and see how much you actually remember, especially to compare that to a second watch.
MauLer doesn't say, or act like he's the “only correct critic,” he complains when specific other critics hide behind subjectivity when making claims that are provably wrong. Otherwise he wouldn't bother talking to other critics.
@@leadfaun Sorry I guess I should elaborate on my drunken ranting. MauLer brands his form of of "objective review" as The Robot and labels all other critics besides his friends as "traditional subjective reviewers" to make himself seem special despite him spending 90% of his videos summarizing a movie franchise and then interspersing that with him delivering his subjective opinions on superficial plot points and dialogue by describing what happens in an exasperated voice or sighing really heavily so that people can just guess what he thinks about what he is showing on screen. He (subjectively) believes that airtight plot and script matter above all other metrics to value movies and blows smoke up people's asses to try and make them believe that this is the sole important thing that makes a movie good and that everyone must agree on it because it is somehow the objective metric. As a result of this he avoids ever considering any deeper interpretations, metaphorical meaning, or social commentary, you know, the stuff that makes art analysis interesting. This is part of a broad anti-intellectualism trend of cinema review and criticism a la Cinema Cins and countless others that try to rebrand their lazy ignorance and refusal to engage with art as the "objective true way to view a film." This type of vapid bullshit can get you by with general audience for dumb fun summer blockbusters like Marvel movies but the format becomes laughable if you would ever try and use it on a movie that demands the audience engage with it and form their own interpretation.
@@leadfaun I should add that my movie commentaries are just as shitty though but I like to think I'm funny. They may be just as shitty in effort but at least they're short and for humor rather than cumbersome 9 hour long epics meant to seriously evaluate the worth of a movie.
@@NotLoopine I don’t agree. He doesn’t think anyone can be completely objective, and he talks about themes and metaphors and subtext. Maybe not *as much* his rage videos, but that’s obviously not the point.
@@leadfaun eh fair enough. It's been years since all the objectivity arguments so maybe he's changed his mind since then. I know he flip flopped on it a bit and did some criticism where subjective and some were objective, just that there wasn't really a way to discern between them often. My opinion of MauLer is basically that I don't enjoy his content at all and he feels more like a drama youtuber to me with EFAP, seeking out his critics for his furry friends to call autistic r*t*rds and such. Calling Anderson a massive F slur and then making a big deal about taking back his apology is still such just a lunatic thing to do. I have the impression that he's kind of a jerk.
speaking of bloodborne, there's an excellent video called Visceral Femininity: A Bloodborne Video Essay by Honey Bat that explores how bloodborne deals with more feminine themes like birth and etc, and idk about you but I would much rather listen to her opinions on the matter than some random dude's
for the record: I like Noah, just thought it was worth mentinong since loopine mentioned it
@@pafunciobatista8244 Sounds neat. Could you do an elevator pitch for the vid?
@@NotLoopine Had to check the video again cuz it's been a while, but from the video's own intro (I'm paraprahsing here): Bloodborne is game that focuses on alot of elements of feminine biology that a lot of dudes are not confotable talking about, such as menstruation, pregnancy, birth and sexuality. In the video she takes a closer look at four topics: Blood, lunar cicles, babies and gods
@@pafunciobatista8244 sounds cool, I'll give it a look. Time to become open minded about icky cooties.
That's a video I wish I could watch but can't because Sony decided for me that I shouldn't be able to access Bloodborne.
I think about the fact that Joe is embarrassed by the idea of giving praise to things. I think he actually struggles with being honest about having positive feelings about something. Like some fear of having a vulnerable opinion.
dishing out negative opinions is definitely harder than dishing out positive opinions which most people will agree with
this was so cathartic. i came here from Gred Glintstone's recent vid.
I don't think MauLer's problem is video essay length. Everybody does the "long man bad" thought terminating cliche when they defend him, but truly, I think what people are picking up on is that the videos are unfocused. He spends a lot of time just candidly remarking on stuff in ways that aren't insightful and in some cases actively detrimental to building understanding. Objectivity misconceptions aside, I think length doesn't necessarily equal thorough critique, a lack of which begins to feel apparent as a video drags on, so that's what most people point to.
Have to disagree here. He spends a lot of time in his videos bringing the focus back to the point that he's making in any given section of his videos. Some of his old videos definitely could use more focus, but he re-drafts his scripts multiple times and if you listen to any of his livestreams or EFAP he explicitly says that he cuts or re-drafts *TO* keep focus.
I feel like a really long critique would have to be thorough, though. It doesn't mean the critic doesn't get things wrong, but if they analyze every inch of a game or movie, it would be pretty long, no?
For most people, they probably just aren't used to long form videos, I know I wasn't. I would watch his videos and realize after thirty minutes that I hadn't been paying attention. Of course now I have the opposite problem where if there is a short video that doesn't explain every facet of its point in detail, I feel like I didn't understand the video, but I feel like that's my shortcoming, not the video's.
I have listened to MauLer's explanation of objectivity in art and its so thorough and logical, not to mention his debate with Just Write, that he has thoroughly convinced me. I ask not to own you or prove anything, I just want to clarify, but what do you think MauLer means by objectivity? Because alot of people have accused him of being an Ayn Rand Objectivist, which he does not believe in at all.
I'm personally not a fan of MauLer, and I gladly forgot most of what I've seen of him, but I feel that meandering on the same points over and over is a problem on some of his video analysis. Lots of youtubers have this big fixation on bloat, to the point writter's editor could make a lot of money trimming the fat on those videos and making their wording more professional.
@enman009 MauLer redrafts his scripts multiple times. I'm absolutely sure he trims it down in the process.
You definitely did forget about what you've seen of him. If his videos aren't your cup of tea, that's fine, but it is another thing to say he "meanders" or his videos are "bloated".
Hey Chariot, thanks for the thoughtful comment as always. I agree with you and I actually just wrote another comment elaborating on why I dislike MauLer's content. It's in my pinned comment replies but I'll just repost it here to save you some scrolling. Cheers.
Sorry I guess I should elaborate on my drunken ranting. MauLer brands his form of of "objective review" as The Robot and labels all other critics besides his friends as "traditional subjective reviewers" to make himself seem special despite him spending 90% of his videos summarizing a movie franchise and then interspersing that with him delivering his subjective opinions on superficial plot points and dialogue by describing what happens in an exasperated voice or sighing really heavily so that people can just guess what he thinks about what he is showing on screen. He (subjectively) believes that airtight plot and script matter above all other metrics to value movies and blows smoke up people's asses to try and make them believe that this is the sole important thing that makes a movie good and that everyone must agree on it because it is somehow the objective metric. As a result of this he avoids ever considering any deeper interpretations, metaphorical meaning, or social commentary, you know, the stuff that makes art analysis interesting. This is part of a broad anti-intellectualism trend of cinema review and criticism a la Cinema Cins and countless others that try to rebrand their lazy ignorance and refusal to engage with art as the "objective true way to view a film." This type of vapid bullshit can get you by with general audience for dumb fun summer blockbusters like Marvel movies but the format becomes laughable if you would ever try and use it on a movie that demands the audience engage with it and form their own interpretation.
My movie commentaries are just as shitty in effort but at least they're short and for humor rather than a cumbersome 9 hour long epic meant to seriously evaluate the worth of a movie.
@NotLoopine Bro, there's so much wrong here. A very good portion of MauLers videos are dedicated to themes and social commentary. You're just wrong about him not caring about meaning and social commentary. I know everyone likes to say that he doesn't care about themes or meaning in art because of his Last Jedi review, but if you actually watch the video he says that the theme doesn't even agree with itself in the movie, not that themes are bad.
Its funny how you talk about how art is subjective and that MauLer doesn't engage with meaningful themes, but then call Marvel movies "dumb fun summer blockbusters", as if there are not very meaningful and good themes in movies like Spiderman, Iron Man, Avengers. You're just a hypocrite. You decided that you aren't supposed to like MauLer, even though you guys would agree on a hell of a lot if you actually talked to him. I watched your video, and even though I didn't agree with everything, it's a well-done video. But this comment is not only obnoxious but wrong and woefully closed-minded. I sincerely hope that if EFAP every covers this video that you go on and talk to MauLer so you can understand his actual point of view, and also maybe come to agreement/disagreement without the uncharitable character you have towards him.
I subscribed to you, and I'm not going to unsub or anything, but please dear God don't lambast someone over things you don't understand.
Joseph just released a video saying he like Lies of P bosses, this guy doesn't make any sense, he don't want to learn boss patterns and moveset in Elden Ring but he like learning how to parry every single ultra delayed attack with instant release and long combo of every single enemy in Lies of P
Lies of P bosses are also good tho
That's funny because you'd think someone like Anderson would have a problem with LoP Bosses for *Allegedly* the same reasons he and others take issue with ER Bosses.
It's probably fair of Anderson to like LoP bosses better than ER if he prefers a certain kind of combat loop, but it does feel like his ER (and DS3) critique suffers from not really being able to take a broader view of what's actually happening even in his own clips. In a sense, him liking Lies of P is the thing that makes the most sense of his Elden Ring views, because Elden Ring would have to be a different game in order for him to grasp it, because he didn't expand his mindset.
@@BBQcheese What got me so mad is that Joseph literally did what I hate about critics: Saying that something is bad in one game and then saying is great in other. Or good and then bad, whatever
He chosed to use stupid takes with ER but he has said things like "The quality never falls" or him just praising things that are worse than they were in Fromsoft games. It just feels like he wants to troll everyone for half of the video, and AFTER THAT he starts making good points.
@@BBQcheese Also, I don't really agree with what you said for LoP bosses. Sure, the are delays that work like they do in ER and are actually good for the boss design and his combat, but some delays are just stupid and aren't well telegraphed to learn them. LoP was an easier game than almost any souls game I've played and the majority of the bosses (not all of them) made me mad because of attacks that need 6 seconds to land while having 3 frame animations. Learning how to parry some of Simon Manus attacks was awful because of this, specially some that look ALMOST the same but have totally different timings
Music and film criticism, while not completely devoid from these problems (eg: Nostalgia Critic's The Wall) I feel their video essays are more nuanced and mature, often far from these issues you mentioned. Folding Ideas, Middle 8 and even Nerdwritter are fantastic channels that, even when you disagree with their opinions, give you enough impartial information so you also come up with your own conclusions; not to mention the fact that their comment sections allow for a vast array of comments, expanding or openly disagreeing with the video's topic with lots of respect. Gaming criticism is so fixated on "I like/dislike, this is good/bad" with little nuance for what the piece is trying to convey or what topic you can tackle with that.
DJ Peach Cobbler's video on House of The Dragon is a fantastic example of a video analysis, no indulgence of "this is good/bad" for 3 hours.
Random Film Talk did an episode by episode(with one extra for final autopsy) critical review of Rings of power, and those videos are so well organized and detailed that I don't mind spending 13 hours watching from time to time.
The best review of a game: give it to Ongbal. If he can make beautiful videos, the game is good. No need to hear his voice, there's a finer form of expression beyond language.
I personally believe that criticism doesnt have to be a bad thing; completely the oposite, a good criticism could perfectly lead to the developers doing better on their next project and perfecting it.
The issue is that everybody calls all their BS on "criticism".
I want to recall the two complete opposites examples you said; Mauler and JA.
One is is a great overanalisis that can lead to a lot of worthless cherrypicking a lot of times, on an attempt to be objective, a lot of value gets sadly diluded by this, although I perfer it to the latter example.
The reason why I despise so much Joseph Anderson critiques is because the attempt of making a first impression video a real critique. If you do that, thats not valid criticism, thats an opinion, mostly innacurate for not knowing how the game works.
A valid criticism is to point out where a game has room for improvement, while being respectful with the work they made. Phrases like "they went lazy" or "they dropped the ball" are straight up unprofessional, and its clearly dissapoints me that channels with 500k+ subs still say that.
This is a bit late, but I believe Manley Reviews is an S Tier reviewer, mainly because he does an excellent arguments without sidetracking. Even when you disagree on something, you see where he's coming from.
@@enman009 I actually Saw a Channel called Domo3000 (a very underrated Channel) which responded very well to at least Mauler critique to DS2.
You might be surprised how many disingenous Some arguments of Mauler were on that critique.
Apart of that, yes, I feel that otherwise his critiques on less complex games like Outlasts are overall way better informed.
@@JoseViktor4099 Oh, I saw all parts of his response. Glad someone finally did a response to Mauler; his videos were terrible and made in bad faith. And this comes from someone that has DS2 as one of his least favorite Soulsborne games.
Calling developers lazy is in and of its self a lazy argument. There is probably a reason why some parts of a game were under developed, more than likely time and the fact the studio needed to allocate teams to more important parts of the game. Devs aren't lazy. They work ungodly hours to make games.
Its always obnoxious coming from a guy who wants us to applaud him for sitting down playing games for a living.
I stan Aesir Aesthetics regardless. I feel he has the closest take on the Fromsoft library to myself.
His vid on Sekiro is so comforting to me. I love his stuff.
bros rocking a killer mustache
I know this video is mad old, but check out f.d. Signifier. He’s the only long form video essayist I’m able to sit down with, and I wonder how his long got content would seem to you
Maulers multiverse of madness video goes through things with time stamps and is actually organized. Its one of his most recent ones and he also goes into themes of the movie too at the end after going through the plot.
I consider long-form content to be like.. an hour
What is that famous quote: Sorry for writing such a long letter. I didn't have time to make it shorter.
I totally agree with you on Mauler. He's genuinely horrible imo
2:33 how do you spell this guy's name? can't find him based on how you'd think it is (matt saba/sabba?)
edit: it's Michael Saba
Matt never said that though... He was explaining idea of themes and demonic imagery using Demon Souls and Bloodborne. He never said anything about rape or problematic artists. You can watch his "Microvideos 2", where he talks about it. The point of that segment was to show in how many ways you can think about media, even if art piece was never about that. Like how people whenever they met something they dont understand immediately try to give it some sort of meaning calling it a demon or an alien. Basically making unknown less scary.
The control thing, I think he meant his "Extrinsic Motivation" video, where Matt explained how games can design motivators inside the game. Which again, fine if you dont like it, but dont call it stupid. If you dont care about that topic, it doesnt make it stupid or pointless.
Dude did him very dirty... He might be really critical and cold, but he does love games and expresses it by giving new perspectives to his viewers. I understand that not everybody needs those type of perspectives, but at least Matt does a better job to deliever interesting views on game design, especially compared to Joseph Anderson who just hates games and fun overall and just presents his subjective hate like its an objective fact.
Matt also criticised himself in "Metamicrovideos" trying again give new perspectives on things rather than push his opinions on others. Im not saying that his videos are perfect, but at least he's self aware of himself compared to some other people who just hate something and call it "objectively shit" and then avoid critique from others.
Im fine with people that dont like videos of other people, but straight up lying about others to make them look bad is very shitty thing to do.
P.S. Im not an english speaker, so apologies for any grammar mistakes.
would you talk about lies of p combat ?
Probably won't have time to play it
I think that's exactly the problem with long-form videos like that, they're done in such a way that you just nod-off to them and barely remember anything about them OR they don't organise/timestamp or research it properly. (Usually both)
I'd say if you're going to do something like that, at least have the decency to research, organise it properly, and ofc have proper timestamps. And at the very least make it fun to watch as well and not a boring slog!
Some videos/creators actually do that at the very least, and can occasionally be nice to sit down with a Hot Beverage & Relax to in order to kill some time. Or to just have on as Background Noise like a Podcast. (Heck I've even put your ER video on, sometime even just in the background, on some occasions ngl) But the vast majority aren't even like that, and are usually best avoided...
I like Noah, he gets a little political now and then unfortunately. But It is nice that in a world of short form garbage he’s got the balls to make a video with real girth.
It's a world of long form garbage too
@@andrewkelly1337 Yes that's true, but unlike IDK MauLer I've never thought that Noah was artificially inflating the length of his videos.
Plus it's easy to go on and on about trash you don't like, but Noah only makes videos about games he actually enjoys, for the most part.
Didn't expected long bad arguments here
"BLOODBORNE SAYS WOMEN AND PREGNANCY IS BAD, ALSO RAPE" I really can't stand that shit.
Same thing happened to me when I was watching a Petscop video. Bro had to Luffy arm stretch to compare themes to fascism, so he could throw up a pic of Donald Trump. 😭
This video and comments portrayal of what Noah said is a stretch to say the least.
@@KyleMolina-y8v Slow your roll, simp.
Matt never said that though... He was explaining idea of themes and demonic imagery using Demon Souls and Bloodborne. He never said anything about rape or problematic artists. You can watch his "Microvideos 2", where he talks about it. The point of that segment was to show in how many ways you can think about media, even if art piece was never about that. Like how people whenever they met something they dont understand immediately try to give it some sort of meaning calling it a demon or an alien. Basically making unknown less scary.
The control thing, I think he meant his "Extrinsic Motivation" video, where Matt explained how games can design motivators inside the game. Which again fine if you dont like it, but dont call stupid. If you dont care, then just dont watch it.
Dude did him very dirty... He might be really critical and cold, but he does love games and expresses it by giving new perspectives to his viewers. I understand that not everybody needs those type of perspectives, but at least Matt does a better job to deliever interesting views on game design, especially compared to Joseph Anderson who just hates games and fun overall and just presents his subjective hate like its an objective fact.
Matt also criticised himself in "Metamicrovideos" trying again give new perspectives on things rather than push his opinions on others. Im not saying that his videos are perfect, but at least he's self aware of himself compared to some other people who just hate something and call it "objectively shit" and then avoid critique from others.
Im fine with people that dont like videos of other people, but straight up lying about others to make them look bad is very shitty.
P.S. Im not an english speaker, so apologies for any grammar mistakes.
I enjoy noah gervais, he doesn't hammer the same point home for 5 hours. His videos do seem to have ideas that he wants to convey. There's just a shitload of them.
Joseph though, Jesus wept, I feel like that guy is just obsessed with the smell of his own farts.
This video seems to come across as "long form bad hurr durr". Like with anything, there good and bad examples.
Joseph Anderson has quite long videos that I really like. They’re always timestamped and he doesnt seem to 'waste' any time imo.
When the horror game does horror smh my head kinda misogynistic tbh
Dislikes long videos, is a streamer, pick one.
I think it’s some cases critics have a huge impact on art. Some objectively bad low effort art has became really popular and sought after simply because a few critics (so called “tastemakers”) sad it’s good. That art can became huge.
bad criticism of critisism is also bad
bad criticism of bad criticism of bad criticism is also bad
@@NotLoopine luckily my comment wasn't that
@@guul66So you said nothing and weren't trying to make any point at all?
@@NotLoopine I was just saying your video sucks. it's not criticism it's an insult.
Jesus Lupine is still on this shtick. Cant wait to hear more bad faith arguments
lol
One of the worst videos ive ever seen
... and bad art is better than overrated art 👀
Not really lol
No? The status of being overrated doesn’t make the thing being discussed worse lmfao. This is so dumb.
I watched all 9 parts of mauler’s hbomberguy response video (hell on earth) and the only thingI remember is that he said that ds2 vanilla had just as much enemy clutter as scholar. (lol)
I stopped watching in the second one when he wasn't able to discern npc invaders from real people and after he complained about the inconsistency of backstabbing while trying to backstab someone in full jester's set 🤦♂️
@victorprati7908 that video is close to 2 hours long if I remember correctly, and those points are specifically like 20 minutes apart, not to mention the rest of the points in the video. You just have an intuitional dislike of him that makes you cherry pick things that he gets wrong.
@@visperad541 bs! I've never heard of that guy up to that point and I found the first video kind of whatever because I gave him the benefit of the doubt but it became unbearable in the second one. There has being ages I've watched it but if anything that left a imprint in my head for sure is that his take was very bad up to that point overall. Now that I think about it I'm planning into put myself through the whole thing just to confirm if your argument find some moments of veracity or if what you said about my view is straight up bs.
@@victorprati7908 Lmao okay
@@victorprati7908 >makes the mistake of trying to backstab someone in jester outfit
>video unwatchable