I've been watching AVGN

[Samildanach]

The Angry Video Game Nerd has been around for a few years now, and it's about two years since I was first shown one of his videos, but in the last couple of weeks I've been watching lots of his videos as procrastination. Some don't really work, or overdo the goofy enactments, but he can be amusing sometimes (despite a sometimes tiresome emphasis on scatalogical abuse).

Also, unlike Zero Punctuation, the Nerd usually (though not always) picks on genuinely bad games (Zero Punctuation has a tendency to really tear into games that are quite good, sometimes over something small that only lasts a few minutes). I think it helps that the games are all old; they're unlikely to be anyone's current favourite.

I find it mildly interesting to watch the videos back to back and observe the Nerd's evolution over time - from the resigned criticism of Simon's Quest, through the vitriolic but sincere disgust at Jekyll & Hyde, to the over the top fury that comprises most of his later output.

When I first saw AVGN I wasn't that impressed, but I think I've learnt to laugh with him. I made a mistake that seems to be common: I took him too seriously. It was always clear that these videos were humorous but, like Spinal Tap, they're more entertaining once you get a feel for the sense of humour.

The complete catalogue of Angry Video Game Nerd videos. I should add a language and mature content warning, I suppose.

ASS!

[zipp]

Whoa, huge deja vu with this thread. I totally remember you posting and saying this. Strange.

Anyway, my response the last time you may or may not have said this remains the same. The AVGN has some great moments. When he's on point, his video reviews are hilarious, such as Ghostbusters or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. But he works best when he's just showing us footage of the games with basic commentary to let us see how bad they are. His witticisms are cringe worthy and when he falls back on fart humour I simply turn him off.

I'm sorry, but an entire episode centered around a flash-animated pickle that just says shit pickle over and over is not funny or even watchable. Similarly, the episode where he creates a clone of himself out of his shit that can only make farting noises is insulting to my intelligence as a viewer.

Anyway, like Yahtzee, he only falls back on these tricks when there really isn't something to say about his game choice, which in my mind says the episode was pointless in the first place. Watch his Ghostbuster reviews. Those games are so bad he doesn't need to add anything except thew occasional emphasis on what the game is doing wrong.

[Samildanach]

Yeah, Shit Pickle was awful. I find AVGN most amusing when he seems sincere - i.e. when he's not obviously affecting a disproportionate level of fury. Sometimes he manages to evoke a genuine sense of playing a horribly frustrating game - a feeling that's uncomfortably familiar. I noticed that the further the series goes on, the more he criticises common game features, like "why am I collecting hearts to use as money?" or "why do all the bosses drop an orb instead of just taking me to the next level?" It's because games do that. They're games.

Anyway, I learned to cut AVGN some slack in his unfunny moments. I gradually caught onto just how farcical the whole thing is meant to be, and while that doesn't in any way redeem the bad episodes, it has enabled me to shrug them off.

Hmm, if I have posted this before, I must have been bizarrely prescient. Until a fortnight ago, I'd only ever watched two episiodes, maybe three, and been indifferent. Hmmmmmmm...

[crysis]

Dec 28, 2009 21:05:50 GMT -5 Samildanach said:

Yeah, Shit Pickle was awful. I find AVGN most amusing when he seems sincere - i.e. when he's not obviously affecting a disproportionate level of fury. Sometimes he manages to evoke a genuine sense of playing a horribly frustrating game - a feeling that's uncomfortably familiar. I noticed that the further the series goes on, the more he criticises common game features, like "why am I collecting hearts to use as money?" or "why do all the bosses drop an orb instead of just taking me to the next level?" It's because games do that. They're games.

Yeah, you're absolutely right. It's those common game features that we just kind've ignore while playing but, when under scrutinization, we scratch our heads and realize just how oddball and downright stupid they are. It's also things that many developers don't do anymore.

For instance, in many of his reviews, he criticizes hitting the jump button and then having to wait for his character to do a "jump animation," like crouching and jumping. Game developers thought that was really cool back in the NES days, the fact that they could animated REALISTIC jumping. Nowadays, the emphasis is, ironically, on animation REACTION. I just watched a whole "making of Arkham Asylum" last night where they talked about needed Batman to be able to immediately pull off a jump with very little animation prior to actually entering the air. Cool stuff.

Anyway, I think ultimately the main reasons AVGN is good is not, unfortunately, because of him but mostly because he's tackling a genre of games that no one else is taking on. It's good material and, like you said, it's best when it's treated simply.

[zipp]

Well, I spent the night catching up on AVGN and I have to say, his Castlevania treatment was amazing. Really well done, with very little of his usual over-the-topness and so much truth to everything he's said. It made me nostalgic. Ever since getting rid of my Wii, N64, and NES a couple years ago, I've been nostalgic for old Nintendo games. I never did get rid of my SNES, and with games like Earthbound and Secret of Mana, I never will, but that Castlevania "en retro" really did hit me. And he nailed it. He totally called the shots on all the games.

[Samildanach]

True, but it confused me that he started the section on Dracula's Curse by saying it was the best of NES Castlevanias, then ended up describing it as a train wreck.

[eviltb]

For the record I loved that Ghostbusters game ;D

[zipp]

Dec 29, 2009 10:13:37 GMT -5 Samildanach said:

True, but it confused me that he started the section on Dracula's Curse by saying it was the best of NES Castlevanias, then ended up describing it as a train wreck.

I think he meant that it was just ridiculously hard, but still his favourite and the best on the NES. I remember playing it and thinking the same thing. "Wow! I can play as a vampire! Wow! I just died a thousand times!"

[Samildanach]

Dracula's Curse is one of only two Castlevanias I own (the other being the N64 version). I borrowed Super Castlevania 4 from a friend years ago, but I remember nothing about it. It's true that Dracula's Curse is a hard-ass game, but the only thing about it that ever really seemed unreasonable was the inability to steer your jumps.

[zipp]

The only Castlevanias I own now are Portrait of Ruin (which is a very refined game that's somehow very boring), Lament of Innocence (which is very unique and cool, but also strangely boring), and the advance one. Don't remember what it's called, but it's actually quite good, shockingly.

None of them are quite as entertaining as the originals, though.

[eviltb]

Did you guys ever play Symphony of the Night?? That was quite possibly the most awesome and infuriating Castle game ever! I was very pleased when it was released on next-gen machines as a download. Never could get the 200.6% completion though... If you can, pick it up from XBLA/PSN.

[Doomy]

I was fortunate enough to pick up the PlayStation version (with music CD and art book) in Electronic Buttocks for peanuts because nobody bought it when it came out. Pretty sure it's the most valuable game I own.

The Official PlayStation Magazine gave it 6/10 while they persisted in giving everything with Lara Croft 10/10. What a travesty!

[zipp]

I've been debating downloading it. I probably will now, based off your reccomendation. Watch the AVGN's Castlevania bit. He talks about it, too.