.
Bunch of autists who rely on clickbait and rushing to upload trailers before Nintendo. Their 8-12 year old Nintendo fanbase think they are credible in any way.
They have no credibility and are considered a joke.
Dude sounds semi-gay with the lisp and talks to fast like hes trying to run out of an Orlando gay bar.
Great reviews.
>>341250802
Nah I know them from the Smash 4 analysis vids but besides that they're a total joke, especiall their reviews.
Stereotypical Gamexplain review: I give this game a smiley face, even though it sucked balls because we need more viewers and we cant allow to break down a game which we have talked about for months now.
>>341250967
Dont forget they're huge beta cucks that cant get enough of cramming their liberal views on to every single Nintendo game.
>>341250967
>They have no credibility and are considered a joke.
Oh noes! Are you saying that people who believe Emily Rogers are full of shit?
LGR.
>>341250802
I'm 99% sure they'er the ones behind the OP and that they browse /v/. Nothing bad about that or them. Just... it doesn't seem like they remember what makes them good.
>>341250967
>>341251709
It's youtube. You have to have that mentality or persona to get the views and money. It's the logical thing to do if you considered thats what you wanna do. It attracts those archetypes. Is it good/bad? .
>>341252165
>it doesn't seem like they remember what makes them good.
This. They got back doing Coolbits for like three videos then stopped again.
>>341250802
>A picture of Link climbing a mountain get leaked
>They made a 30 minutes video talking about it
They are a bunch of autistics manchilds.
>>341252526
Two videos actually.
as people i got nothing on them, but as youtube gamer reviewers theyre ok. just ok
>>341250802
>trusting people that review shit for living
can't you form your own opinions, baby?
>>341252526
I wasn't suprised there were four videos on it.
I was suprised to see it was over 40 mins of content on one art work
>>341252609
Actually, looking at their YT channel... they uploaded 4 videos about it.
It's kinda ridiculous.
>>341250802
more like shillxplain
I used to like them, but now I really hate them. They sold out big time, they make shitty click-bait "discussions" over every single thing, literally an hour after it happens. And they post final bosses and credits before a game is released.
Their only single redeeming factor is trailer analyses. And even those are mostly pointless and full of speculation.
I like Gamexplain.
>>341252526
>>341253331
>30 minute video on a single picture
You guys are joking right? How in detail can you be about link climbing a mountain?
>>341253331
>I was suprised to see it was over 40 mins of content on one art work
Yeah it's a discussion even, not just one guy giving theories. I can tell if that's better or worse at this point.
>>341253576
How do they get so much stuff to show?
Does Nintendo actually send them stuff?
>>341253680
It's so surprising given all the EXCITING new Nintendo™ content coming out that they need to cover as well!
>>341253680
I haven't watched but I assume they wonder if the Bridge is Eldin bridge, what those towers do, if the lake is Hylia, if you can climb stuff and what significance the shit in e background has.
Or they could just wait till the game is out...
His top of the years are reliable, his reviews tend to have valid reasons for the points other than "I like the gimmick" or "it's a good concept".
I trust him.
>>341253417
Well they need those jucy klicks and Nintendo wasn't ecactly a swollen cow those past couple of month.
Just wait after Treehouse is over, Youtube will choke from bazillion videos "explaining" every blurry Zelda polygon.
Remember when they released a shitload of -1min videos that one time?
Remember how they lost A LOT of subscribers over it?
Remember how GameXplain was clueless about why they lost so many?
They cut it out after a while, but still. Tells you on what kind of mentality they operate.
>>341253718
They are Nintendo partners. They get invited to shows and review copies. Other than that they reupload Nintendo's videos, their recordings of the Directs THEN then reupload trailers/footage they saved from Nintendo's channel, then last but not least rumors in particular by Emily Rogers.
>>341253718
Nintendo gives them games to review, which they then pick apart piece by piece for as many videos as possible.
Then they'll make videos for every single leak under the sun, with lengthy discussions and fan-feedback discussions, no matter how obviously fake the leak might be.
>>341254085
How many?
I'm going to unsub soon just due to the amount of stuff once Pokemon is out
>>341253935
I'd like him and others a lot more if they'd stop inserting their faces into videos. No one came to see these goofballs' faces and yet they keep doing it.
>>341254231
Can't remember, it was years ago. But significant enough to let them notice and us mention once in a while in these threads.
>>341254151
I was surprised they didn't do videos on the whole MH 'rumor', not even a 'it's fake' video.
>>341254231
At least they don't spoiler everything in their video thumbnail, like the two newly revealed pokemon yesterday, like other fuckers did.
>>341250802
>taking your opinion from others
pretty sure that dude with a lisp is a kike as well. all he plays is mario and zelda and uploads clickbait and already posted nintendo trailers for easy money.
>>341254352
He only does it for the top of the year afaik, the individual face reviews and analyses are without his face, which are the ones I watch.
>>341251709
Why does the red always have to bring politics to this shit. You can obviously tell they're libs by their mannerisms, but you are really reaching here.
>nintendo release one piece of new Zelda U art, and a lanyard
>30 fucking minute video about it, when we're going to see the game soon.
>>341253935
Weedboy is best boy. Best opinions about videogames with some exceptions, and the only person with common sense on the internet.
>>341254352
He rarely inserts his face into the videos anymore. The only times he did recently was because sponsors. I kinda miss his goof face.
>>341254773
I seriously don't get what makes that lanyard so special.
Sephirothsword57, how can other reviewers even compete.
>>341254942
It had two different artworks of Link we've seen before.
For some reason it meant two genders
>>341254352
Whenever a video of any kind has a face-cam, I don't click. I hate that shit so much.
Unironically, Angry Joe.
>>341255062
why are femlinkfags so delusional?
How the hell does GameXplain literally upload Nintendo's content (with their logo on it) to YouTube without copyright strikes?
>>341255062
>For some reason it meant two genders
Oh god, the autism on GoNintendo over that was ridiculous. Even after revealing it to be old artwork, they still insisted it was a girl because of the eyebrows. One dude responded to every single comment with "but did you look at the eyebrows?!?!??!!?"
>>341255390
It is considered journalism.
>>341250802
I do watch some of their stuff but I always have to take it with a grain of salt because they are massive shills for Nintendo. But Nintendo has gotten so bad this past year or so that even they've started giving up on them.
how come no one has posted Mark yet
>>341255398
And just a few days from seeing the game too.
Such nonsense.
>>341255572
He doesn't do reviews anymore. He milks his drones on patreon for money and uploads videos of him reading a wikipedia summary of games in his shitty voice while saying memes and thanking patreon backers.
>HERE SOME THINGS YOU PROBABLY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IN STAR FOX ZERO
well jee thanks. It's not like the game hasn't been released yet fags.
>>341255390
probably associated with them, like the completionist or that one dude that always makes boring videos about pokemon
Nintendo gets a percentage
>>341255492
Even if they're literally doing nothing but reuploading their video with their own name on it? Isn't that the very definition of plagiarism?
>>341255572
>Black Hole
Holy fuck, I love that table. Literally own it on Pinball Arcade.
>>341255831
It's basically like rewriting press releases, only with even less effort
>>341253417
>mfw it's the same bloody art piece they keep posting
like shit the art is nice but c'mon overanalyzing the shit of an art piece that hasn't told us anything is ridiculous.
>>341250802
Speaking in all seriousness.... Mysoginists who think having a female Link is "controversial." Their analysis videos are in depth but their commentary feels like it is coming from 8 year olds.
>>341256124
(you)
>unquestionably trusting any reviewer
>not playing the game fore yourself
>Not making up your own mind
>Not making your own review
>Not just consider other reviewers opinions
>>341250802
Mark Bussler from Classic Game Room
>>341256448
>friend keeps posting projared e3 reviews on the skype group
>shilling around like he is right
>ignore them everytime
>>341250802
None. I care a lot more about presentations of games than opinion pieces at this point. This is how I discover and decide on a game:
>see coverage of some new game
>look at metacritic scores
>seriously start considering whether it's something I'd be interested in playing, based on genre etc.
>consider how much I'd pay for it and stay tuned for a sale
"Revievers" only play a role as part of step 1.
thank baby jesus for https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY0lhTq5r18
>GameXplain
Literal Nintendo shills.
The only objectively trustworthy review of a game is the opinion of /v/ taken at least a year after its release. No where else in the internet will anyone speak more openly and no company will sustain shilling for the game for a year after its release, outside of maybe mmo games.
If i have to buy a game before a yeaf passes, i wont read reviews and instead i will look up how the dev or publisher have performed in the past. If there is a demo i will try it, if there is no demo and i absolutely want it, i will pirate it and have a go. If all these fail, i will read the negative user comments to get an idea of how bad it could be before finally committing my money.
All these replies and no christcenteredgamer mentioned. /v/, anon is disappointed.
>>341257212
Some still argue over whether HL and HL2 are good games, /v/ is a shitfest of a reviewer, what are you even
>>341250802
I only trust myself
Mathewmatosis
and this guy: >>341253935
About the only thing I trust are Let's Plays and the little thing on the Steam Page that tells me the ratio of positive/negative reviews.
Is there anyone else?
>>341258447
He's such an autist in streams or when he's hosting.
