Why would you include a quote from ggmanlives in your trailer?

[Artur]

The guy lost all of his credibility when he made his Starfield review calling it a "phenomenal achievement".

[Delta Dagger]

Originally posted by Artur:

Game looks fun, unlike Starfield.

So, what's the issue? A Youtube talky man you don't like enjoyed something you might? If you balk at something because someone you dislike also enjoys it, WEW LAD, that's no way to enjoy things.

[Sui]

As long as it's not IGN, I honestly don't care. I may not like some YouTubers, but at least with YouTubers it's fairly easy to figure out based on their biases whatever I will like the game or not. Well, maybe not based on a single line... but then it's still a recommendation for people who watch him.

[Zorro]

How about forming your own opinion like a functional human being instead of yUtUv GuY sAyD iT

[Xeilua]

Gman is fantastic, get out of here with that noise

[VinylMorpheus]

Why are you even writing post instead of playing the game...or doing anything else

[Witch Hunter Siegfried]

Or Under the Mayo AKA Mr "Ultra Kill is bad because it's not Doom Eternal" having a cameo in the game

[Balm]

Originally posted by Artur:

It's not just a "bad review", he straight up lied and tried to peddle this sad excuse of a game to his audience for personal profit.
If it was just a bad review due to his personal >authentic< opinion I wouldn't even care that much.
Also calling my thread an "insane troll thread" for stating facts you can look up for yourself makes you sound like an insane prejudiced fanboy.

oh you're serious
lol

[Jams]

So what? Why do you care so much about what a YouTuber thinks about this game based on his opinion of a completely different game? This post is just sad dude...

[Wiscobetic]

I mean, in the scope of a game Starfield was pretty ambitious, and it did pretty well at it. Its just too bad the gameplay was not as enticing for most. I enjoyed the playthrough, but I wouldn't say he lost credibility at all.

[Sticky White Stuff]

Originally posted by Artur:

It's not just a "bad review", he straight up lied and tried to peddle this sad excuse of a game to his audience for personal profit.
If it was just a bad review due to his personal >authentic< opinion I wouldn't even care that much.
Also calling my thread an "insane troll thread" for stating facts you can look up for yourself makes you sound like an insane prejudiced fanboy.

That is true, but the opposite of that is ALSO true. He genuinely loves FPS games and enjoys them. Most of this reviews for FPS games are spot on. Even non-FPS games are reviewed in good taste.

It's obvious he was paid or had to make Starfield look good if he signed a contract to review the game pre-release. Sure, it's a scummy move, but no one bought it. Simply because everyone else was dunking on the game. I don't doubt he didn't enjoy something from Starfield, even tho it's a trash-tier game, but he surely didn't enjoy everything he mentioned.

People post videos that often ruin their reputation. Look at Crowbcat. He lost all his credit points after the stupid "Soul vs Soulless" meme video. But that doesn't negate some of his previous points he/they made.

Just like GGGMan made one bad review, but made thousand of other, honest reviews out there. He doesn't simp for every FPS game, just look at Phantom Fury, Graven, etc.

[faijeya]

I wish Paul from Mitten Squad was still alive.

[Mastodon_2]

I wouldn't put too much stock in anything Gman says, it's all an act for click-farming. Go and watch his early videos where he spoke like a normal person, then watch one from today where he talks with that weird bogan accent and makes awful jokes every other sentence. I used to feel like he was someone that could be trusted to give a good review, but it's clearly all an act now.

Not to mention, he is incapable of being consistent and comes across like Mary Whitehouse at times for no reason. When he talks about Doom, he's like "OMG, I love the chainsaw, I love chainsawing people to bits, I love the gore, it gives me a boaner", but at other times he seems against gore, where he calls it "just sick and gratuitous". He can't decide whether he wants to be a ultra-bogan or Mary Whitehouse, it would seem.

[S☯wn-Lﺤuꁅhtǝr]

Originally posted by Artur:

The guy lost all of his credibility when he made his Starfield review calling it a "phenomenal achievement".

Starfield was a phenomenal achievement the issue was like most AAA games as of late they are rush releases, sliced up as DLC incomplete packages, being teased new as a beta.

[Reported.]

Originally posted by Sm Izumi:

I just don't like this way of using it, he got the early builds, is credited by the devs, obviously he'll suck their balls in the review. This is disgusting.

Although i have to say, it's fun to get free keys, i do that too but the second you don't suck them, they stop giving you free keys and they start blacklisting you.

Its called "gaming journalism". You must be glowing in your "reviews" (which are basically curated press releases), or you will be blacklisted from early access. And that early access is something GmanLives lives on for ALL his content.

Live with it, or find a YouTuber that has integrity enough to not take early review copies, or who waits for the dust to settle before reviewing something.

Originally posted by Suicide Machine:

As long as it's not IGN, I honestly don't care. I may not like some YouTubers, but at least with YouTubers it's fairly easy to figure out based on their biases whatever I will like the game or not. Well, maybe not based on a single line... but then it's still a recommendation for people who watch him.

GmanLives is the equivalent of IGN for early release retro FPS reviews. Its something he completely intended. And its profitable for him to be a content farm.

[Hex]

Don't own the game pal.