Retro Gamer magazine's terrible Metal Slug feature --reviewed!

[BanishingFlatsAC]

The double ass shot ftw

 

[Praise the Lard]

I do still like making images!

 

[Jedah Doma]

I do still like making images!

Thread is now complete.

Holy crap I almost pissed myself.

 

[ki_atsushi]

Never has any man been as comfortable in his own skin as Rot.

That's why we love him.

 

[Steve]

*wonders what would happen if Rot ever met up with Merc in real life*

 

[Domino-chan]

*wonders what would happen if Rot ever met up with Merc in real life*

The world would surely implode on itself.

And I will be at Ground Zero with a camera.

 

[Mike Shagohod]

*wonders what would happen if Rot ever met up with Merc in real life*

The world would surely implode on itself.

And I will be at Ground Zero with a camera.

More like we'd drive around in a HumVee blarring Eagles of Death Metal songs, smoking cigars, and I'd be dressed dead to toe in military gear, shirtless but with a navy blue bullet proof vest and a WW2 helmet with the words: "FUCK ME? FUCK YOU!" on it... all the while rot would only have those three AES clam shell cases covering him, yelling at passerbys, on our long road trip to Vegas. Where I would finally exit the Rade made "Desert Assault Vehicle" of mine, and into the Bunny Ranch to live out a 1990s sexual fantasy with porn chick Sofia Ferrari. I dunno what Rot would be doing outside though.

Then I figure about the time I was blowing my wad all over Sofia's face and tits Domino would be taking a photo of Rot and the world would implode. As we awake in another dimension/world line, John Titor is there to greet us and we get to see the words "GAME OVER" forever in the sky where the moon was. Beyond that, no one really knows?

 

[ironish]

(B) his only real argument is that his article can't be poorly written if it doesn't contain any factual errors. [/B]

I'm still trying to comprehend the idea put forth by Stu that his composition can't be poorly written, as Bobak contends, if it doesn't contain any factual errors. That seemed to be the basis for his argument.

I was thinking the same thing. I've seen plenty of reviews that sucked because the people reviewing the game gave poor scores for dumb reasons, and there were no "factual errors."

 

[Twinkle Star]

Agreed.

Yeah that's right!!

 

[Ancient Flounder]

Be on the look-out for a Metal Shit 2 cart soon, Rot.

 

[strider]

[Its tough to follow Rot...]

If you summarize this lengthy thread down to its core, you'll find:

(A) Stuart Campbell really couldn't defend himself against my accusations of poor writing (substantively, anyway),

(B) his only real argument is that his article can't be poorly written if it doesn't contain any factual errors.

But don't take my word for it. Since quoting would get long, here are the key posts in this thread (with some summaries), in order:

-- Original Post: Point-by-point I state that Stuart Campbell's terrible Metal Slug piece is badly organized, poorly written, and that it sticks out as a horrible example in a mag I've bought regularly for years. I make the logical conclusion that the author is a poor "journalist", and a hack. (I feel bad for the more qualified writers in the UK and around the world who are losing work because he gets RG to keep employing him)

-- Well before Stuart discovered someone had pointed out his poorly written article, Geddon chimes in to say the review matched his reading --and is joined by Praise the Lard, Kiselgof and YuckMud, who all came to the same conclusion (and they're not even the White Knights or sock puppets)

-- Mr. Campbell's Response. There isn't much substance to summarize: the entire crux of his argument was its meant as a joke, there were no factual errors (which was also false), and his experience gives him better insight into how to write an article. The entire reply is using variations of "I'm a great writer in my own mind" to explain why the article was so poorly written, poorly organized and generally bad compared to the other articles in the same issue. Sure, there were an awful lot of words, but --if it isn't obvious-- Mr. Campbell is great at quantity over quality (and there are apparently people willing to pay for that).

-- Before I can get back to this thread, a lot of members point out it is astonishing that a so-called professional can't take professional criticism. He pretends that I was harsh, but anyone who's read criticism, of movies, books, etc. knows my words were hardly exceptional. In fact, I held back. He doesn't know how to, which is why arguments like this and terrible writing are he has to show for at 41 years.

-- My response (part 2 of it). Thanks to the unexpected surge in drama, 24 hours later its on page 6. I point out his theme of unsuccessfully zeroing in on a handful of issues in my criticism, while ignoring key points. Sorry to reiterate the point: but he doesn't bother to try an answer many of my original points because he can't, and those he tried were effectively refuted. The original article is still poorly organized and executed, and now we also know he can't defend himself very well.

-- In a moment where I assume he didn't actually read the original post, Darran (lead editor of RG) starts repeating Stuart Campbell's argument that a lack of errors removes any accusations of poor writing, omissions, etc... (which has no logical basis). He then basically expresses: "Oh, what can I do? Its not my problem. So I won't do anything." I'm sure I'm not the only one who's studied leadership and management in school; and one aspect of a good leader is the willingness take whatever responsibility --real or perceived-- they can muster to control damage to their organization; not dismissing it on a technicality.

I want to suggest all people reading this thread go to their Borders and Barnes & Noble and read the article --don't buy the magazine unless you enjoy the article. Everyone knows those mega stores welcome people doing this (page through it in the cafe or on the many comfy chairs), and you don't have to fork over $12 plus tax.

You're too late Bobak. Rot's elevated this to a new level entirely.
Plus I never said what you've stated, but you're free to interpret my silence here any way you choose.

 

[Mayhem]

It's the thread that keeps on giving... epic pics Rot, even though I had to quickly scoot them by cos like, somewhat NSFW!

Just be careful no one tries to have you donate to charity like peeps did with Jeremy Clarkson's details

 

[Mike Bevan]

Credit where credit's due - Rot's post is pretty special

Now, can we all get along yet?

 

[buster_broon]

who took the photos Rot?

the friend from Uni or the missus?

 

[Professor Denim]

who took the photos Rot?

the friend from Uni or the missus?

Rot is my hero.Amazing stuff!!!!

 

[FairlanePhantom]

Good old days- 1993

If this is a Morrissey fan club, I can see why he got lazy.

Can you fly Bobby?

 

[Lastblade]

lol, Rot, is that the MS2 I sold you a few years back??? LOL awesome.

 

[frazer99]

Rot that was the best post in this whole thread !

Now i'm thinking.....if that's your beloved copies of MS1, 2 and 3 then....I wonder where that copy of Chibi Quiz i bought from you has been.

If Jan needs somewhere to stop for a while then tell her to drop me a line.

 

[HeartlessNinny]

I was going to say something, but I just read Rot's post. So.... nevermind.

 

[NeoTheranthrope]

EPIC, but to make this thread truly transcendent, we need a pic of some stu-cock, CM1985-style.




Too bad he's too big of a chicken to show how he truly measures up.

 

[Koopa64]

Damn, the thread died at 1000 posts?

 

[ForeverSublime]

"For Auction: Metal Slug 3 Home Cart Premium" 1,000,000$

Question for seller:

What's premium about it?

Answer:

It has cock-rot.

 

[kazuo]

Why the fuck are people still posting in this thread

 

[ratson]

Cause you don't have to read the whole story after Rot's pics and vid,fucking amazing Rot,had any comment from stu yet?

 

[kernow]

Damn, the thread died at 1000 posts?

is it coincidence you made the 1000th post?