Is Adam Sessler really an idiot? (POLL)

I've grown to admire the man, and I still like him.  However I just saw this including the comments, and my mind changed just a bit.

So, my fellow gamers, how do you feel about him?

Where do you disagree with Sessler?
Where do you agree with Sessler?

What don't you like about him?
What do you like about him?

I can't seem to find the clip the guy was responding to tho.

I respect Adam Sessler, he is one of my go-to games journalists. That being said I greatly dissagree with most of the opinions he holds of Nintendo.

I respect Adam Sessler, he is one of my go-to games journalists. That being said I greatly dissagree with most of the opinions he holds of Nintendo.

DarkGamer007

I liked him on X-PlayExiled_Badger

I stopped watching the video when he made the statement that all hardcore gamers are just about FPS and are jerks.

I know in the USA people had to fight Nintendo to get Xenoblade Chronicles and The Last Story.

Who the **** is Ellis?

I respect Adam Sessler, he is one of my go-to games journalists. That being said I greatly dissagree with most of the opinions he holds of Nintendo.

DarkGamer007

I don't think he's an idiot, I think he's just in way over his head and in the wrong career.

Despite his seeming hatred for Nintendo, I don't mind him at all.  I've usually enjoyed watching him over the years.  That said, I don't watch everything he says or does so I may be out of the loop on why some dislike him so immensely.

i enjoy watching him. he had some of the best E3 coverage this year

I GUESS I liked Sessler on X-play, although the entire time I was actually oogling at Morgan Webb (whatever happened to her?)

Now, I really don't care for his reviews. I think he tries too much to sound overly sophisticated that his reviews come out as too convoluted, or more than it needs to be. Plus that 'out of 5' ratings scale is drab and plain, and not something I really take that seriously. In short, I really don't go to him to decide if I want a game or not. If he likes something, it's bc everyone likes it, if he has something bad to say, it's usually for superficial nonsense reasons.

As far as that video, that guy really does make excellent points about Adam Sessler, his hate on Nintendo, and all the junk Microsoft has pulled. So while I don't hate Sessler, I certainly don't care for him.

Adam Sessler is right. They need to please the "hardcore gamer". They won't be able to compete in the long run. They are sporting an overpriced and underpowered console. They are pumping out 2D style Mario and Donkey Kong games, Zelda remakes and 3DS ports with only one or two big titles announced for this year. These games don't even cater to somebody like me in the slightest.

He is by no means saying these are the things he wants, he is saying these are the things they need to change in order to compete in the long run. Once the PS4 and Xbone are out Nintendo could very well crumble. Yet all of their games that most people want won't actually be ready till 2014.

well, he's definitely said some dumb things before ("RE5 is racist" then "i'm not saying RE5 is racist, but it feels really racist"), but i guess everybody has had those moments and his happen to come while he's in front of a camera. i don't think that makes him an idiot and i do think a lot of his opinions are worth listening to.

as for the video by "synonym for angry video game nerd #565356," it's hard to really respond to without getting the full quote by sessler.

I've grown to admire the man, and I still like him.  However I just saw this including the comments, and my mind changed just a bit.

So, my fellow gamers, how do you feel about him?

Where do you disagree with Sessler?
Where do you agree with Sessler?

What don't you like about him?
What do you like about him?

I can't seem to find the clip the guy was responding to tho.

Hseptic

But its fun to listen to the fanboys.

I don't really follow him. But the few times I've listened to him talk, I didn't get the impression that he was an idiot. Maybe I missed something. Or just haven't seen him say anything that set off any alarm bells.

I DISAGREE WITH SOME GUY ON THE INTERNET. I DEMAND THE ELECTRIC CHAIR FOR HIM! MYFAVORITECOMPANY (TM) 4LAIF!!! 

Can't say I've heard of him.

The guy in the video just seems like a huge Nintendo fanboy whose hate for Sessler is generated by the fact that Sessler's opinion of the Wii U is negative and differs, therefore "invalid". 

Adam Sessler is right. They need to please the "hardcore gamer". They won't be able to compete in the long run. They are sporting an overpriced and underpowered console. They are pumping out 2D style Mario and Donkey Kong games, Zelda remakes and 3DS ports with only one or two big titles announced for this year. These games don't even cater to somebody like me in the slightest.

 

He is by no means saying these are the things he wants, he is saying these are the things they need to change in order to compete in the long run. Once the PS4 and Xbone are out Nintendo could very well crumble. Yet all of their games that most people want won't actually be ready till 2014.

contracts420

So...so much wrong.

Zero Nintendo games post-launch and low (and steadily declining) levels of third party support are perfectly acceptable. Only an idiot would say otherwise!

[QUOTE="contracts420"]

Adam Sessler is right. They need to please the "hardcore gamer". They won't be able to compete in the long run. They are sporting an overpriced and underpowered console. They are pumping out 2D style Mario and Donkey Kong games, Zelda remakes and 3DS ports with only one or two big titles announced for this year. These games don't even cater to somebody like me in the slightest.

He is by no means saying these are the things he wants, he is saying these are the things they need to change in order to compete in the long run. Once the PS4 and Xbone are out Nintendo could very well crumble. Yet all of their games that most people want won't actually be ready till 2014.

Goyoshi12

So...so much wrong.

You claim I am wrong but fail to provide any counterargument. Seems legit.

[QUOTE="Goyoshi12"]

[QUOTE="contracts420"]

Adam Sessler is right. They need to please the "hardcore gamer". They won't be able to compete in the long run. They are sporting an overpriced and underpowered console. They are pumping out 2D style Mario and Donkey Kong games, Zelda remakes and 3DS ports with only one or two big titles announced for this year. These games don't even cater to somebody like me in the slightest.

 

He is by no means saying these are the things he wants, he is saying these are the things they need to change in order to compete in the long run. Once the PS4 and Xbone are out Nintendo could very well crumble. Yet all of their games that most people want won't actually be ready till 2014.

contracts420

So...so much wrong.

You claim I am wrong but fail to provide any counterargument. Seems legit.

It'd take a long time for me to write up a response to that.

Adam Sessler is right. They need to please the "hardcore gamer". They won't be able to compete in the long run. They are sporting an overpriced and underpowered console. They are pumping out 2D style Mario and Donkey Kong games, Zelda remakes and 3DS ports with only one or two big titles announced for this year. These games don't even cater to somebody like me in the slightest.

He is by no means saying these are the things he wants, he is saying these are the things they need to change in order to compete in the long run. Once the PS4 and Xbone are out Nintendo could very well crumble. Yet all of their games that most people want won't actually be ready till 2014.

contracts420

I misread this and thought it said Adam Sandler, to which i would of said hack and used up comedian riding on used-farts.

but ok. Adam Sessler. I really like him, i've liked him since his G4 days. He was the really the only reason i kept going to their website, was to see what new thing Sessler had posted. or to see him and the crew on Feedback.  Think they only other game-show i do that with is Podcast Beyond crew at IGN and Gametrailers' Invisible Walls. When Sessler left, i remember i stopped going to G4 as often, instead of every couple of days, it was every couple of months, then i stopped all going there all together. 

when I learned he moved to rev3games, that is when rev3games became one of the few game channels i will routinly visit. 

Adam Sessler is one of the few game journalists out there who does a couple of things that draw me to him,  He seems to me to genuinely enjoy and love games and the people who love them. He has an academic approach, but it's more grounded and less abstract and ephemeral. He doesn't use his position - i've never felt it really - to basically bully people from his pulpit with his social-politics. And he looks like he has fun doing what he does. 

and on the topic of his words with Nintendo? no i don't think he is wrong, and i don't think he is being unduly mean to Nintendo either. On this topic i'm pretty much on the same wavelength as him.

When you go to Rev3games site, they got a funny corny video as to why you should stay at rev3games for your gaming news. This is the sort of fun, i loved about old gamespot, old g4, and Giantbomb. seems most of the main video game sites either don't have the budget, time, or desire anymore to have these little fun stuff in em'.  Stuff like that adds up for me. 

Half the time the game journalists I see on game sites, seem like people who - at one point - loved games but have since grown out of them. But because it is a job, that they're good at and it's paying some of the bills they'll keep doing it. but there is no love anymore in games, not genuine at least. That isn't a fact, that is just a strong impression i get from current and former game journalists editorials and podcasts. 

Big reason why i stop going to certain game sites all together is the editorial teams. places like 1up.com (when it was around), kotaku, escapist, and destructoid. If i can't stand the people who write for that place, i leave.  and Gamespot for me is more like that corner where Jay and Silent Bob stand by all day. i've come here so often for so long that this is the default game site, but it's not the same place with the same people that i remember from 7+ years ago either. If not for Kevin VanOrd, Jess Mcdonell, Chris Watters, and a few others remaining with the site, i'd of probably left a long time ago. 

i think he's pretty stupid.

No, I like Sessler.  He's got some valid points about Nintendo.

Too bad the hardcore gamer doesn't want any part in what Nintendo tries to do to please them post N64 (when the most "hardcore" games were by Rare and other devs, not Nintendo themselves) no matter what they beg them to do. Eternal Darkness on the GameCube bombed and there was/still is a controversy over Bayonetta 2. Nintendo always aimed for a casual approach since the NES and the face that they aimed for the core with a Wii U ended up being a mistake just by how everyone flanked Nintendo over Bayonetta 2 (which happened before the tech specs were even revealed).

nintendoboy16

I always hear you say this and feel like it's a problem more widespread.  I think a lot of gamers (aside from die-hard Nintendo fans) that could be considered the "core gamer" hold an overall feeling of great apathy and irrelevance to them that has built up over the years.  People care about core games, they just don't care about them on any Nintendo system unless it's Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Smash, etc.    Not being able to sell games that aren't its base titles stems from an overall lack of consumer faith in the company overall.

Having these constant problems each generation with 3rd party support, software droughts, etc, is hurting their image, and damaging consumer confidence.  So I think core games don't do well when Nintendo tries is due to peoples' perception of them caused by their performance throughout the years.  It's larger than the games, because if MS and Sony can successfully do it, then there's no reason why Nintendo (especially Nintendo) shouldn't be able to either.  I don't blame the consumer.

Sessler is alright, I like him more than Jim Sterling, but he's still not very intelligent, in my opinion.

Watching his most recent Address the Sess was tough. There are so many questions he asks aloud that have such obvious answers. Sometimes I think video game journalists (or analysts) try too hard to mirror the sentiments of their fanbase. As an example, he was asked about the upside to the 24 hour check in with the original Xbox One policies. He had no answer! Know who else didn't? Most of the gaming community.

But it's obvious at this stage, isn't it? Regardless of whether you love or hate the family sharing plan Microsoft had in the works, it was obviously the reason behind needing the 24 hour check in.

They sat there, all ten of them, in the Google+ Chat, unable to figure out why a check in would be necessary with a digital sharing ecosystem. This inability to figure out the obvious might be acceptable for the regular gamer...but for an analyst? It's just embarrassing.

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]Too bad the hardcore gamer doesn't want any part in what Nintendo tries to do to please them post N64 (when the most "hardcore" games were by Rare and other devs, not Nintendo themselves) no matter what they beg them to do. Eternal Darkness on the GameCube bombed and there was/still is a controversy over Bayonetta 2. Nintendo always aimed for a casual approach since the NES and the face that they aimed for the core with a Wii U ended up being a mistake just by how everyone flanked Nintendo over Bayonetta 2 (which happened before the tech specs were even revealed).

MirkoS77

I always hear you say this and feel like it's a problem more widespread.  I think a lot of gamers (aside from die-hard Nintendo fans) that could be considered the "core gamer" hold an overall feeling of great apathy and irrelevance to them that has built up over the years.  People care about core games, they just don't care about them on any Nintendo system unless it's Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Smash, etc.    Not being able to sell games that aren't its base titles stems from an overall lack of consumer faith in the company overall.

Having these constant problems each generation with 3rd party support, software droughts, etc, is hurting their image, and damaging consumer confidence.  So I think core games don't do well when Nintendo tries is due to peoples' perception of them caused by their performance throughout the years.  It's larger than the games, because if MS and Sony can successfully do it, then there's no reason why Nintendo (especially Nintendo) shouldn't be able to either.  I don't blame the consumer.

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]Too bad the hardcore gamer doesn't want any part in what Nintendo tries to do to please them post N64 (when the most "hardcore" games were by Rare and other devs, not Nintendo themselves) no matter what they beg them to do. Eternal Darkness on the GameCube bombed and there was/still is a controversy over Bayonetta 2. Nintendo always aimed for a casual approach since the NES and the face that they aimed for the core with a Wii U ended up being a mistake just by how everyone flanked Nintendo over Bayonetta 2 (which happened before the tech specs were even revealed).

nintendoboy16

I always hear you say this and feel like it's a problem more widespread.  I think a lot of gamers (aside from die-hard Nintendo fans) that could be considered the "core gamer" hold an overall feeling of great apathy and irrelevance to them that has built up over the years.  People care about core games, they just don't care about them on any Nintendo system unless it's Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Smash, etc.    Not being able to sell games that aren't its base titles stems from an overall lack of consumer faith in the company overall.

Having these constant problems each generation with 3rd party support, software droughts, etc, is hurting their image, and damaging consumer confidence.  So I think core games don't do well when Nintendo tries is due to peoples' perception of them caused by their performance throughout the years.  It's larger than the games, because if MS and Sony can successfully do it, then there's no reason why Nintendo (especially Nintendo) shouldn't be able to either.  I don't blame the consumer.

yes

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]Have you ever actually asked yourself why people don't want to have anything to do with Nintendo when they do try?

I always hear you say this and feel like it's a problem more widespread.  I think a lot of gamers (aside from die-hard Nintendo fans) that could be considered the "core gamer" hold an overall feeling of great apathy and irrelevance to them that has built up over the years.  People care about core games, they just don't care about them on any Nintendo system unless it's Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Smash, etc.    Not being able to sell games that aren't its base titles stems from an overall lack of consumer faith in the company overall.

Having these constant problems each generation with 3rd party support, software droughts, etc, is hurting their image, and damaging consumer confidence.  So I think core games don't do well when Nintendo tries is due to peoples' perception of them caused by their performance throughout the years.  It's larger than the games, because if MS and Sony can successfully do it, then there's no reason why Nintendo (especially Nintendo) shouldn't be able to either.  I don't blame the consumer.

MirkoS77

Sessler is alright, I like him more than Jim Sterling, but he's still not very intelligent, in my opinion.

Watching his most recent Address the Sess was tough. There are so many questions he asks aloud that have such obvious answers. Sometimes I think video game journalists (or analysts) try too hard to mirror the sentiments of their fanbase. As an example, he was asked about the upside to the 24 hour check in with the original Xbox One policies. He had no answer! Know who else didn't? Most of the gaming community.

But it's obvious at this stage, isn't it? Regardless of whether you love or hate the family sharing plan Microsoft had in the works, it was obviously the reason behind needing the 24 hour check in.

They sat there, all ten of them, in the Google+ Chat, unable to figure out why a check in would be necessary with a digital sharing ecosystem. This inability to figure out the obvious might be acceptable for the regular gamer...but for an analyst? It's just embarrassing.

experience_fade

[QUOTE="experience_fade"]

Sessler is alright, I like him more than Jim Sterling, but he's still not very intelligent, in my opinion.

Watching his most recent Address the Sess was tough. There are so many questions he asks aloud that have such obvious answers. Sometimes I think video game journalists (or analysts) try too hard to mirror the sentiments of their fanbase. As an example, he was asked about the upside to the 24 hour check in with the original Xbox One policies. He had no answer! Know who else didn't? Most of the gaming community.

But it's obvious at this stage, isn't it? Regardless of whether you love or hate the family sharing plan Microsoft had in the works, it was obviously the reason behind needing the 24 hour check in.

They sat there, all ten of them, in the Google+ Chat, unable to figure out why a check in would be necessary with a digital sharing ecosystem. This inability to figure out the obvious might be acceptable for the regular gamer...but for an analyst? It's just embarrassing.

Jacanuk

Lol... I'll explain it for you.

Let's say I have Ryse. Without a check, I could digitally lend it to you and never get online again. You could hide offline as well. Then I could go and sell Ryse at GameStop. You still have it though.

See the problem?

This especially gets complicated when you factor in the obviousness of piracy. If digital copies (that can be shared legally) of a game aren't regularly regulated and verified using the internet, then what's to stop me from uploading Ryse to a server for everyone to download?

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"][QUOTE="experience_fade"]

Sessler is alright, I like him more than Jim Sterling, but he's still not very intelligent, in my opinion.

Watching his most recent Address the Sess was tough. There are so many questions he asks aloud that have such obvious answers. Sometimes I think video game journalists (or analysts) try too hard to mirror the sentiments of their fanbase. As an example, he was asked about the upside to the 24 hour check in with the original Xbox One policies. He had no answer! Know who else didn't? Most of the gaming community.

But it's obvious at this stage, isn't it? Regardless of whether you love or hate the family sharing plan Microsoft had in the works, it was obviously the reason behind needing the 24 hour check in.

They sat there, all ten of them, in the Google+ Chat, unable to figure out why a check in would be necessary with a digital sharing ecosystem. This inability to figure out the obvious might be acceptable for the regular gamer...but for an analyst? It's just embarrassing.

experience_fade

Lol... I'll explain it for you.

Let's say I have Ryse. Without a check, I could digitally lend it to you and never get online again. You could hide offline as well. Then I could go and sell Ryse at GameStop. You still have it though.

See the problem?

This especially gets complicated when you factor in the obviousness of piracy. If digital copies (that can be shared legally) of a game aren't regularly regulated and verified using the internet, then what's to stop me from uploading Ryse to a server for everyone to download?

[QUOTE="experience_fade"]

[QUOTE="Jacanuk"] Strong opinion coming from you. But actually your kinda wrong, the 24hour check in had nothing to do with the familiy sharing plan, it was plain and simple a DRM nothing more. Why else would your mediabox brick if it didn´t call home, if it was because of the digital sharing ecosystem, then you would assume that MS was clever enough just to block those features and not the whole gaming option. So you kinda missed the boat on that one.Jacanuk

Lol... I'll explain it for you.

Let's say I have Ryse. Without a check, I could digitally lend it to you and never get online again. You could hide offline as well. Then I could go and sell Ryse at GameStop. You still have it though.

See the problem?

This especially gets complicated when you factor in the obviousness of piracy. If digital copies (that can be shared legally) of a game aren't regularly regulated and verified using the internet, then what's to stop me from uploading Ryse to a server for everyone to download?

Poor guy.

Your negatives are, of course, all non-existent for those that have even the most spotty, unreliable internet. It was kilobytes of data, so much so that a phone could make the check for you. So for those without an internet connection, yes, those are the downfalls with being able to trade games with anyone in the entire world almost instantaneously.

I'm not saying it isn't valid. Those without an internet connection should have never bought an Xbox One in the first place (before the policy switches).

But for those that do, all of your negatives don't exist :D

Instead, we get the very first platform that includes digital sharing. Pretty big, considering Valve started looking into it the moment Microsoft announced it. 

Edit: To further dismantle your argument, I'll quote from Adam Sessler, the very guy I don't agree with (who has similar views as you). Even he admits that the industry is heading online. He predicts that many games will require an internet connection to play in the near future, not just multiplayer games. Forza 5 is an early example. 

So the industry is heading digital, everyone who loved the digital sharing knew it, and most analysts on the other side (like Adam Sessler and Jim Sterling) understand it's coming too. 

So your negatives will apply to a lot of games in the future, anyways. Regardless of the Xbox One or PS4.

Further edit: I mean, look at the PS4. If you didn't have an internet connection, you wouldn't get to experience about half of their launch lineup of games. Most of their games are digital/indie, and thus only available only on the PSN.