The Angry Joe Show/Headscratchers


 * Why is the swearing sometimes censored & sometimes not?
 * Rule of Funny.
 * I may just be watching the wrong videos, but has Corporate Commander showed up since Kan and Lynch 2? I don't know how well he's been received, but I want to see more of him.
 * Angry Joe's treatment of the halo franchise just bugs this troper. Starting with ODST's review more then anything, which seemed to focus on the 'wallet rape' despite that every game that gets released ends up with a $60 price tag. Claiming that most review sites were giving it 'biased ratings' because it was a halo game. Despite that once again, 4 point scales are pretty common with most 'professional' reviewers. Then comes Angry Joe's Reach review, which while better still manages to cause this troper to delve into 'what the fuck' territory. For example the fact that he criticized the game for not having multiplayer space battles with Sabres that would have ripped off battle front 2 and being more of the same. Despite that Bungie experimented with them early on and decided against it since it would be unbalanced which comes of as down right hypocritical when you consider that he praised the developers of the KOTOR MMO for not getting in over their heads with space combat by making it an on rail shooter. As for the thing about claiming bungie were just pandering to halo's fanbase. Despite that reach had more changes then the jump from halo 2 to 3. New game types, more armor customization, armor abilities, new gametypes, new weapons and vehicles as well as removing duel wielding, removing a lot of recognized weapons, especially covenant ones. And even adding more options into forge mode. Options that make map making so much easier for this troper. It really seems like angry joe is just out to spite the halo 'fanboys' to this troper.
 * About the "wallet rape" I have to say that I agree (if a bit nuanced) with Joe. The game didn't have enough content compared to its bigger Halo brothers to warrent a full price, $60 price tag on release. ODST didn't offer enough new content to justify that, like the short campaign (which took me about 5 hours on normal and 8 on legendary to finish. But nonetheless I still enjoyed the game and didn't really agree with the rest of Joe's (and other harsh critics') criticisms. Halo ODST felt more like an expansion to me than a true stand-alone game, that's all.
 * Considering that they were only given a year and it was Microsoft that forced bungie into doing a full release. I'd say that the content is understandable as the average game dev time is 2 to 5 years (Bungie wanted ODST to be DLC expansion, MS said no.) Even barring that, EVERY game nowdays gets released at a $50/60 dollar price tag. So saying ODST is wallet rape for lack of content to price ratio comes off as illogical when you consider how many horrid games that actually have less content come out for $60...
 * Also this Troper remembers how Joe went on twitter defending Reach to Spoony for awhile.
 * "Angry Joe heads The Resistance whose purpose is to defend our gaming freedoms from Corporate, a ruthless organization determined to rule the world through the proliferation of bad games!" The same vague corporate idea that he's railing against is what has also given us great games. Sure, there are exceptions, but almost all of the games that are considered the greatest of all time weren't exactly created in non-corporate environments. They just happened to have loving and talented designers.
 * Empires are always evil. Resistances are always good. Joe is taking the oldest, most discussed, deconstructed, and etc trope in the game storytelling book and playing it perfectly straight.
 * Angry Joe is railing less against corporate in general and more against the practices of EA and Activision that are usually frowned upon by gamers. In otherwords companys that have little love for the industry and are only in it to make a quick buck at the expense of us gamers
 * ^What this troper said. Notice how much he loves Bioware, who take the time to make a good game, and compare it to Activision or EA, who have a reputation for just milking games with no real care to the quality of the game. "4 hours" anyone?
 * Just a slight point that bugged me - EA own Bioware, and have actually been pretty good at not milking their series (Sports games not withstanding) as of late, unlike Activision. And the "4 hours" example would actually make sense if EA or Activision published Kane and Lynch, but that's a n Eidos Square Enix game.
 * I always just saw it as Joe making a fun format for his show while pledging to keep corporate politics from letting his honest opinion be heard.
 * What happaned to the Superhero gimmick Joe used to have (ie.his secret identitity as mild mannered Joe) I've seen a few of his early videos and wondered where it went?
 * Maybe he dropped it, because Linkara has a similar gimmick.
 * What's the deal with the text on the background screen? Sometimes it simply repeats or sums up what he's talking about, but other times it responds and refers to Joe in third person like it's some kind of AI buddy or similar.
 * Why did it take him more than two months to review Green Lantern: Rise of The Manhunters? Joe's whole schtick is that he reviews the recent releases, but I don't think anyone will argue that a two month old game that ties into a film no longer in cinemas doesn't exactly qualify as a recent release.
 * Why is he the flagship reviewer for Blistered Thumbs, when he only has an Xbox 360 & a PC and thus can't review any of the exclusive releases on the PS 3 & Wii?
 * Ultimate Marvel Vs Capcom 3 - A lot of people has seen this infamous vid by now, but he's recently done an interview by Seth Killian. Rather than being a professional and asking questions and listening to his answers, he flat out disrespects the guy, not letting him finish his sentences or not even looking at him in the eye, coming off across as condescending and rude with his tone of voice and body language. Even moreso, he's still talking about a game that he told his own audience not to buy weeks ago and yet here he is still talking about it, and being immature about it, no less
 * He also still manages to get some of his questions wrong.
 * I knew Joe was salty about the game, but not to the point where he'd be such a dick to Seth Killian. Seth isn't even responsible for the game's creation, he's just the messenger and PR guy. He's one hell of a cool guy, and Joe is being REALLY immature about this game's existence.
 * Even more so with his recent Top Ten Games of 2011 list. He's still nitpicking on Vanilla Marvel vs. Capcom 3's lack of features despite the Ultimate update already being out and giving us a very beefy Heroes and Heralds mode.
 * And now he's put Vanilla Marvel vs. Capcom 3 on his Worst Games of 2011 list. Despite the fact that he gave the game an average review for lack of content, but still said that the actual fighting engine is great. Not to mention the fact that he made several scripted videos revolving around him playing it. I guess the realease of Ulitmate Marvel vs Capcom 3 really hit him harder than it should have.
 * In his defense, Joe has stated in his Mortal Kombat review that he views it (Mortal Kombat) as the new standard for fighting games here on out. Perhaps he was comparing (U)MvC3 to that.
 * Not that it helped since he constantly hammered at MVC 3 in that review every 5-7 seconds or so.
 * Perhaps he's one of the many people bitter about Legends 3's cancellation.
 * Wasn't that the incident when he went on in character without realizing it was a serious thing and ended up looking like a dick? I'm sure he's already appologized for that and realized his mistake. As for the game being on his Worst Game '11 list, Meh, its just his opinion. I actually love that game, but I've basically lost interest in holding other people's opinions against them.
 * Nope, Joe never apologised for his behaviour.
 * If Corporate Commander is supposed to represent Executive Meddling and Money, Dear Boy, then what is the Doctor Claw-esque Overlord supposed to be?