@Jamoid @7_armageddon_7 Right. I agree. But watching the video and looking at the comments GS (Johnny) made about Tom's review, the comments made do not only apply to those over-the-top drivel, but also to ANYONE who disagrees with their review.

@Jamoid @7_armageddon_7 The problem is, they're poking fun at some over-the-top rage-filled comments *while* defending the review in its entirety, standing behind the writer (Tom). So, on one hand, you have GS making fun of some pretty ridiculous comments criticizing the review while, on the other, you also have GS defending its review. Put the two together, and it's basically portraying those who didn't like the review in the same category as those hate-filled posts.

Make no mistake: this Feedbackula episode highlights the fact that there is GS (i.e. 'us' in the video) and then there are posters like you and me ('them'). Notice that Johnny is using 'us' in defending Tom McShea's review, presenting a GS united front to everyone else (i.e. the posters like you and me).

So people laughing along with him and GS are essentially laughing at the group to which they belong like little sycophants while GS smiles at people from our own group, the posters, turning on each other while they present their united front in their Feedbackula video.

@erxevo Not saying the love is undeserved, but GS REALLY, REALLY loves RockStar: see GTA IV and Red Dead Redemption winning virtually every award they had.

@Krelian-co Exactly. The posters on here laughing with good ol' Johnny at the comments are in fact laughing at the population to which they belong: the people who post on GS.

GS is 'them' - just pay attention to Johnny's language in defending McShea's review: 'us', 'us', 'us'. GS users aren't included in that group.

Seems like this is a video where Gamespot 'defends' itself while ridiculing its user base in a sense.

@_Strelok Look at the reviewer's description of himself at the end of his review, a signature as it were. A trollish signature that fits this situation perfectly and is basically advertising the fact.

Tom McShae's mini bio at the end of the review: "Tom McShea loves platformers and WEIGHTY MORAL DECISIONS. [...] you can just call him the JERK WHO HATES ALL THE THINGS YOU LOVE and LOVES ALL THE THINGS YOU HATE"

If that isn't the largest indicator that the reviewer is a troll, I don't know what is.

For those defending the score as the reviewer's opinion: if there is a TREND that a certain reviewer tends to produce HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL reviews, then it's no longer just an opinion. The LEGITIMACY of Tom McShae's opinions can be called into question.

For those thinking that McShea's review is 'justified' and merely an opinion, if the the reviewer in question is often at the center of controversy then his judgement can be called into question.

Look at Zelda Skyward Sword: Metacritic 93 Tom McShae 7.5/10

Now, it's The Last of Us: Metacritic 96 Tom McShae 8.0/10