Jim Sterling

[madhair60]

- Takes controversial position in monetised video
- Gets loads of angry comments
- Makes Commentocracy video in monetised video

He's sort of a genius? But also an annoying cunt. Discuss.

[The Boston Crab]

His character where he's in the wig is really annoying in many ways but actually funny as well in such an obvious way. Growing up I would have destroyed him but that's probably not a good thing.

[Kelvin]

Why does it matter if his videos are monetised? That's not hypocritical, or contrary to anything he's ever said. As I said in the other thread, he's critical of predatory, dishonest or hypocritical behavior, not companies (or individuals) making money in any way at all.

And I don't believe he's a contrarian, either. He's hyperbolic for comedic purposes, but that's not the same as putting forward false/inflated opinions just to stand out. His core points have always been well argued, articulate, and consistent.   

His character where he's in the wig is really annoying in many ways but actually funny as well in such an obvious way. Growing up I would have destroyed him but that's probably not a good thing.

How would you have destroyed him? By putting on a bigger wig, and doing an even louder voice?

[Thursday]

So how is the combat system, in Odyssey, bosto?

[Barry Admin]

Unles something's changed recently, he doesn't monetise his videos.

[Kelvin]

Unles something's changed recently, he doesn't monetise his videos.

Good point, I'd forgotten that. He moved to Patreon a while back.

[The Boston Crab]

So how is the combat system, in Odyssey, bosto?

The Spartan kick is probably the most satisfying move in any action game I've played this year.

[bgmnts]

Honestly think he's fucking top. We need people to keep pointing how scummy the greedy bastards at the top are. It's as simple as that.

Also, pretty sure he is exclusively backed by donations.

[madhair60]

Why does it matter if his videos are monetised? That's not hypocritical, or contrary to anything he's ever said. As I said in the other thread, he's critical of predatory, dishonest or hypocritical behavior, not companies (or individuals) making money in any way at all.

Unles something's changed recently, he doesn't monetise his videos.

I didn't know that, but I didn't mean it as a criticism that he does (which he doesn't!); I thought it was pretty savvy that he riled gamers up then farmed their insane comments for even more money.

Interesting to learn otherwise, it's a good way to get material.

[biggytitbo]

The reason he keeps making the same video, with the same complaints, is the game industry keeps doing the same shitty things. Even if it can get a bit repetitive its good that someone with a fairly high profile like him keeps highlighting bad practises in the gaming industry so they don't become normalised.

[Twed]

Sometimes I fear that my aversion to people who just look and sound like big pompous bags of wind makes me miss the good things they might say once in a while.

[Thursday]

I don't pay much attention to this stuff much now anyway, as I mostly just play Destiny, which is of course, completely free of bad business practices...

[Phil_A]

I miss the days when he just used to play awful Steam games and take the piss out of them, but I realise that must turn into a fucking awful drudge after the 50th terrible asset flip of the year.

[bgmnts]

I miss the days when he just used to play awful Steam games and take the piss out of them, but I realise that must turn into a fucking awful drudge after the 50th terrible asset flip of the year.

Plus he was the victim of a mental lawsuit for doing that.

[Thursday]

He did really go for Digital Homicide though, and though they had no ground to stand on they were such a small fish to go after. I liked him at the time, but that was one of the first things that just felt a bit unpleasant to me.

[Phil_A]

He did really go for Digital Homicide though, and though they had no ground to stand on they were such a small fish to go after. I liked him at the time, but that was one of the first things that just felt a bit unpleasant to me.

Eh? You might want to look into the facts of that case again, Jim didn't "go after" them, Digital Homicide tried to ruin him by instigating a series of frivolous lawsuits all because he gave them a shitty review. They even tried to sue Steam users that gave them bad ratings, utter maniacs.

The fact it ended up backfiring on them just felt like justice had been done, frankly. They were a bunch of bullies trying to abuse the law to silence critics of their terrible products, and they got what they deserved.

[Thursday]

What came first, that podcast or the attempted lawsuits?

[Kelvin]

Do you mean the interview with the guy? That came first, I think.

You're right that Sterling did go after them hard, maybe harder than was necessary for that one specific company. On the other hand, that company was abusing the steam marketplace and absolutely taking the piss with paying customers. Clearly there were larger, more influential targets, including Steam itself, but Sterling went after them hard, too. Digital Homicide were taking advantage of people, and irrespective of size, they were symptomatic of the wider issue Sterling was trying to point out. They certainly weren't some poor little indie developer being bullied unfairly. They were a greedy, dishonest and extremely unpleasant company that didn't like having a light shone on their shoddy practices. They weren't alone in being criticised by Sterling. They were just the ones were were the biggest cunts about it. Maybe he focused too much on them, but they were far from victims.

In fact, if ever there was evidence that Sterling doesn't just say edgy things to get views, it was his tireless campaign against an issue (Steam Marketplace) that mattered to very few gamers, and wasn't exactly headline material.   

[Rev+]

The problem with Digital Homicide is that they were so thin-skinned and entitled they kept responding to him.  If they hadn't done that he'd probably have just done one video on them and moved on.

He does monetise his videos by the way (unless that's changed very recently).  The Patreon covers his 'main' weekly video and some of the little offshoots, but everything else on his Youtube channel is monetised.

He's alright I suppose.

[Kelvin]

The problem with Digital Homicide is that they were so thin-skinned and entitled they kept responding to him.  If they hadn't done that he'd probably have just done one video on them and moved on.

He does monetise his videos by the way (unless that's changed very recently).  The Patreon covers his 'main' weekly video and some of the little offshoots, but everything else on his Youtube channel is monetised.

He's alright I suppose.

I've just checked and his videos contain no ads, and no ads show up alongside them in the next up section. Some games advertise under the videos, though, so maybe he does get money from them, or maybe its just because he uses footage from them, I don't know. He definitely gets most of his money from patreon, but I'm now totally confused about whether or not he monetises his videos.

Either way, I don't think it undermines any of his points, whether he monetises his videos or not.

[Kelvin]

Actually, looking up online, it's apparently a mix of both. He doesn't monetise The Jimquisition episodes, but does monetise some of the other videos he puts out.

[Rev+]

It doesn't undermine anything and he's always been clear about it:  the 'headline' stuff isn't monetised, videos like 'jimpressions' or other bits and pieces are.

[colacentral]

This is the sort of thing he says:

"That would be fine, if I could navigate the FUCKING menu."

Big laugh from the american kids.

[bgmnts]

This is the sort of thing he says:

"That would be fine, if I could navigate the FUCKING menu."

Big laugh from the american kids.

He's mostly playing to an American audience to be fair to him.

[robotam]

His wee comedy bits are bad and his main joke is elongating and overemphasizing the occasional word.

Couldn't be bothered with his stuff anymore, but I reckon he's a good guy.

[Moribunderast]

He's the only YouTuber I watch and I think the Jimquisition does a really good job at hammering the industry for it's avarice and greed. His podcast is decent, also, though I wish it were just Jim and Gav as Laura can be a bit tedious. He's obviously not going to be to everyone's tastes as he's very obnoxious but I can deal with that given that it's generally aimed at the right targets.

[The Boston Crab]

When I finally do my podcast, this guy will be finished. No point him existing. Just pure truth and heart-warming entertainment, but also cutting directly into the heart. Gonna be quite something, not just about games but also my insights and lessons on life. AC Odyssey every week for one whole hour section, just telling stories about the game and life.

[BritishHobo]

I fucking love him, and not just because I'm a dirty SJW. I think he feels constantly genuine in wanting to actually improve gaming and the discourse around it. I also very much like that you can still hear the Ray Peacock/Peacock and Gamble influence in his comedic voice.

[ASFTSN]

His wee comedy bits are bad and his main joke is elongating and overemphasizing the occasional word.

Triple Ayyyyy + Liiiiiive services x 1,000,000.

I still laugh every single time.

[saltysnacks]

He looks like he'd be a really attentive lover.