|
Angry Joe did a lot less trashing than most critics on the Internet. There were a lot of games he had little but praise for, and a game had to be really bad to get much more than disappointment from him.
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
Yeah the only things Angry Joe actually gets angry about are non-video game things which is kind of counter-intuitive to his job as a video game reviewer with a gimmick!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Lazyfire posted:Looks like Angry Joe has decided to stop covering Nintendo games after the company announced their weird rules about posting gameplay videos. I haven't seen much of Joe, but I thought his gimmick was green-screening himself to make it look like he was from the Neo-future. (That and Superman T-shirt with leather jacket.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
If I remember right the guy gave DmC like an 8/10, despite his own disappointment with it and the bitter feelings that were running rampant through the fandom at the time. He seems surprisingly reasonable?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:51
|
|
|
Combat Lobster posted:I haven't seen much of Joe, but I thought his gimmick was green-screening himself to make it look like he was from the Neo-future. (That and Superman T-shirt with leather jacket.) He's from the Nostalgia Critic's site right? If so then everyone on that site gives themselves a dumb story with OCs and bad costumes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
bobjr posted:He's from the Nostalgia Critic's site right? If so then everyone on that site gives themselves a dumb story with OCs and bad costumes. It's mostly just him and Linkara nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure everyone ran away from that sinking ship due to really awful contracts or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 09:04
|
|
|
HGH posted:I'm pretty sure everyone ran away from that sinking ship due to really awful contracts or something. Nah, they didn't even have contracts. People just jumped ship because that place was a trainwreck. It was basically the extreme conclusion of "paid in exposure".
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 09:06
|
|
|
Angry Joe is pretty much the only person from that site that was smart enough to basically go solo on YouTube, while the others clinged on that horrible blip based site. He's done really well after that, and I kinda gotta respect him for it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
What is/was the deal with that site? Did people get paid to be on "Channel Awesome"? I read a lot of the stuff that Lupa and Phelous posted, but I cannot figure out what the point of it was since they apparently did not get paid yet were told how to run their shows. Was the payment the satisfaction in appearing in the god awful movies the nostalgia man wrote?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
judge reinhold posted:What is/was the deal with that site? Did people get paid to be on "Channel Awesome"? I read a lot of the stuff that Lupa and Phelous posted, but I cannot figure out what the point of it was since they apparently did not get paid yet were told how to run their shows. Was the payment the satisfaction in appearing in the god awful movies the nostalgia man wrote? The benefit was mostly the exposure they got. Most of them were relatively unknown before appearing on the site.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 13:08
|
|
|
In the end there were so many people joining that hive for exposure that it all turned into white noise with streaks of brown.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:In the end there were so many people joining that hive for exposure that it all turned into white noise with streaks of brown. Seriously, I checked their site like a month ago just to see how bad it got, and it's Brad Jones and five hundred thumbnails of a movie with some random reviewer screaming next to it. Brad, buddy, you're too good for this. Move on like everyone else man. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
Finally, the recognition the series deserves http://www.avclub.com/article/five-nights-freddys-video-game-be-made-movie-217680
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
It might not be so bad. It's not like they can turn it into the Silent Hill movies. I would worry though if it gets slapped with a pg-13 rating though. suspense/horror doesn't tend to do well with that kind of rating outside of Coraline. Plus it would be fun to see hollywoods take on it as long as they follow the source just a tiny bit. It would certainly be boring if it was an hour and a half of a security guard sitting in a room looking at monitors.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
I certainly hope its entire method of scaring the viewer is jumpscares, those worked so well in the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
Honestly tongue-in-cheek slasher horror with a huge loser as a temp in this homicidal pizza parlor could actually be a very fun watch if written right. It's not a terrible elevator pitch for a self-aware horror movie, let's be fair.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 06:41
|
|
|
nendymion posted:It might not be so bad. It's not like they can turn it into the Silent Hill movies. I would worry though if it gets slapped with a pg-13 rating though. suspense/horror doesn't tend to do well with that kind of rating outside of Coraline. Plus it would be fun to see hollywoods take on it as long as they follow the source just a tiny bit. It would certainly be boring if it was an hour and a half of a security guard sitting in a room looking at monitors. PG-13 isn't really worrisome. The rating depends on the amount of gore, sex, and cursing more than the actual fear it generates. Five Nights at Freddy's is already basically PG-13 at worst in most of its content.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 08:37
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Finally, the recognition the series deserves It's paranormal activity, but with more animals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 12:29
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Finally, the recognition the series deserves Jesus Christ.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 13:05
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:Finally, the recognition the series deserves Ehh. I hope they don't mess it up, but I won't be surprised if they do. I cannot help but admire a game that not only has such a unique gameplay but even use it to accentuate the horror element.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Andrast posted:The benefit was mostly the exposure they got. Most of them were relatively unknown before appearing on the site. That seems odd, like, how do you really quantify the exposure? Also, they seemed to create rules about how many ads the people on the site could display, whether or not people could promote patreon, etc. Like, why would you listen to people not giving you money telling you how to get money in favor of the vague prospect of maybe capturing a chunk of the audience that only goes to see Nostalgia Critic and never looks at the sidebars or whatever? Maybe that is part of why it's going "the way of the dinosaurs". Suspicious Dish posted:Finally, the recognition the series deserves I am going to go wait in line for this movie now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
I only ever got bits and pieces of the TGWTG/Channel Awesome story, but it seems like the site wasn't making enough money and there was some cronyism going on i.e. site management trying to maximize their own profits in people using the site as a portal and pulling up ads as opposed to the video producers running midroll ads, which generally deter people from wanting to watch the videos and thus coming to the site at all. I know there was some confusion over Patreons, which would also draw people away from the main portal because they'd be using Patreon as a portal instead, and personality conflicts have been going on and driving producers away from the site for years. I think most of the really old TGWTG crew have moved to other sites except Doug himself and Linkara, and most of the producers there now are people who just started since the move to Channel Awesome a few months ago. There IS definitely an exposure benefit, at least from my perspective as a viewer, since when I go to the site, there's a chance I'll see a thumbnail for a video that interests me and I'll check it out. I believe the producers are left to their own fundraising devices, though, and there's no kickbacks from the site at all. There's probably some minimum number of crossovers with other producers on the site as well, for cross-promotion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Speaking of TGWTG, this compilation of someone hired to help with sound production on Kickassia in a 4chan thread has been floating around for a bit. The whole thing might be bullshit, but it certainly goes along with other behind the scenes stories that have popped up over time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:Ehh. I hope they don't mess it up, but I won't be surprised if they do. I too hope they stay true to the spirit of this awful flash game based on a mediocre 1990s fmv title.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:Yeah the only things Angry Joe actually gets angry about are non-video game things which is kind of counter-intuitive to his job as a video game reviewer with a gimmick! Yeah but Weepy Joe doesn't pull in the numbers
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
I can't watch Angry Joe because the way he clasps his hands and smiles when he talks makes it looks like Happy Mask Salesman Reviews. This could also count as a pro to some people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
I stumbled upon some dude spamming another LP forum and he was posting these images for his video thumbnails:      Jesus gently caress that guy looks psychotic 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
Big Scary Owl posted:I stumbled upon some dude spamming another LP forum and he was posting these images for his video thumbnails: These people and their stupid goddamn mugging faces.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 06:06
|
|
|
There should be a contest for the worst title card that has the person's face put in some way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
Danaru posted:Speaking of TGWTG, this compilation of someone hired to help with sound production on Kickassia in a 4chan thread has been floating around for a bit. The whole thing might be bullshit, but it certainly goes along with other behind the scenes stories that have popped up over time. I was looking for this image a while back and couldn't find it. Thanks! It's kinda funny how the entire TGWTG and Channel Awesome just slowly burned out and is basically dying off at this point, I could've sworn there was a time where it seemed like it was pretty up there in terms of popularity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Jsor posted:I can't watch Angry Joe because the way he clasps his hands and smiles when he talks makes it looks like Happy Mask Salesman Reviews. You've met with a terrible game, haven't you?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
SuccinctAndPunchy posted:I was looking for this image a while back and couldn't find it. Thanks! It's kinda funny how the entire TGWTG and Channel Awesome just slowly burned out and is basically dying off at this point, I could've sworn there was a time where it seemed like it was pretty up there in terms of popularity. It was pretty popular for a while, and helped define early nerd video review trends. However the site launched around 2008, and the vidoes themselves were Blip.tv based. Unfortunately for them, 2008 was also when YouTube really started to take off. YouTube became the internet video standard, while Blip.tv kept getting worse with more adverts and shittier tech all around. This is why I think that Angry Joe was smart to move on YouTube around that timeframe. Then the TGWTG-site started to curl up inside it's own rear end with the dumb crossovers, continuity and content bloat, and they kept losing key people to dumb drama (Spoony, etc). Combine that with the growing popularity of YouTube based vloggers and LPers, and you get the barren wasteland Channel Awesome is now. (edit) I used to spend far too much time watching their videos back in the "good" old days. 
Attestant fucked around with this message at 11:58 on Apr 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 11:55
|
|
|
Can you even do TV/Movie reviews like that on youtube without losing all the ad revenue to copyright claims?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 12:44
|
|
|
Andrast posted:Can you even do TV/Movie reviews like that on youtube without losing all the ad revenue to copyright claims? You have to pretty much constantly battle copyright claims with fair use counter-claims- which you shouldn't even have to do in the first place, but this thread has been over YouTube's copyright claim garbage many times- but it is possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Andrast posted:Can you even do TV/Movie reviews like that on youtube without losing all the ad revenue to copyright claims?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
DialTheDude posted:I find most movie reviewers on Youtube nowadays just forget about ad revenue and make their dough off Patreon or other crowd-funded donation sites. It's pretty much the simplest way to not want to deal with copyright claims if you acknowledge the footage isn't yours from the start. Monetizing/not monetizing your videos doesn't affect whether or not you'll get copyright strikes or claims.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
slowbeef posted:Monetizing/not monetizing your videos doesn't affect whether or not you'll get copyright strikes or claims. Yep. I know the OSW Review guys (who chronologically critique wrestling PPVs) get claims on their poo poo all the time and it's not monetized. They've also moved to their own website now to avoid that issue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Wierdly enough, I had a claim on a video, and acknowledged it since I don't monetize anyway. A few weeks later, it just went away on it's own. I have no idea how they work anymore. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
Copyright claims have nothing to do with you monetizing, they're a thing copyright holders can do to assert that they own some part of a video you've uploaded, be it game audio, art assets or even just the game you're playing. At that point, any ads run on the video will give the revenue to the copyright holder and even if you weren't running ads, the copyright holder themselves can play ads on the video.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 18:06
|
|
