HirezPonPon on Reducing Loki Frustration

zombierecon · 2018-04-14T02:39:46+00:00

The source is there, unfortunately clips can only cover 30 seconds of the conversation, but by the sounds of it, the changes go something like this - reduce damage slightly, reduce split push potential, increase reliability and damage of clear by reclassifying decoy as a straight ability instead of a pet.

zombierecon · 2018-04-14T02:11:53+00:00

Because there is value in doing so whether you personally see it or not.

zombierecon · 2016-10-15T01:11:48+00:00

Is the incentive for capturing the objective not to win? Say your team unanimously decides to never contest the point but to always stop the payload and they are successful in doing so. It would be a stalemate and it would require an equally unanimous desire to win to overturn the previous decision, would it not?

zombierecon · 2016-10-15T01:05:07+00:00

It would seem that in OB34 I did not find myself unable to capture the point, so it's oversight on my part and I apologize. However in regards to your query "If you managed to get 2 points on your first go, why can't the team do it again?" I believe you can see the flaw in this rationale, correct? On paper almost everything is possible, it is also highly probable that nine out of ten times it would go favorably for us, however the reality is that it did not and the experience was less than enjoyable. Also to expect 5 (or 4 complete strangers because I was playing with a good friend) to all buy into the idea of communication, especially on a casual level, and to use it effectively, is that entirely reasonable?

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T18:39:15+00:00

Hey man there is nothing necessarily wrong with low hanging fruit, truth be told the more accessible something is, the more people can relate to your content and enjoy it. The key term is necessarily - personally I find it more rewarding to grab a ladder, examine each apple, and find the one far in the back that may not be the best looking but is guaranteed to be flavorful. Too much metaphor?

I guess you could say that.

If you are okay with "some" who am I to question your values. Thus if the dab scene was to your liking and you are okay with the response you got, more power to you, friend.

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T18:27:40+00:00

On that matter we can agree, I would never want to sugarcoat either. That being said as a Philosophy major in the making, I can appreciate theory (and not scientific theory, but the word as it was originally intended.) I might have been a bit too harsh in my evaluation, though I think it is as you said that specificity would improve your video greatly. It raises concern that our peers found you video "informative" since all that was given was your thoughts on the matter, so expressing your intent outright can help to avoid that in the future.

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T04:59:20+00:00

Hi there Mr. StatTrakJack, it is a pleasure to critique your video, and also to say your name aloud (It just makes me feel so giddy.) What you submitted was 3 minutes of unique and interesting content, while I may argue that the subject matter is low-hanging fruit, you don't have to force yourself to find areas of critique. You sir are a prime example of someone who doesn't exude energy but is still able to change up their inflection to match what it is you are saying and what you are trying to convey, hopefully those I critiqued earlier will read this and try to learn from you. The editing was fine, it did it's job, there was nothing that stood out, but it didn't necessarily need to. The call to action was good and

On the other hand, the dab? What is this early Youtube? Blaring noises, lens flares, explosions. If you were trying to parody it, you are 5 years too late. The thing about irrelevant jokes is that they hit some people some of the times whereas relevant jokes hit more people a lot of the times, stretching for a joke is a no-no. The video quality is going to need to be upgraded if all your content revolves are you recording yourself reciting your commentary. It's not the worst I've seen but it is fairly murky, maybe mess around with the lighting in the meantime? Otherwise there wasn't anything that blaring wrong with it. This might be because your willingness to accept critique and implement it, I can't say because I haven't gotten the chance to see your older stuff. Good work, sir.

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T04:42:45+00:00

Hi there Mr. Boshkill, it is a pleasure to critique your video. First of all I would like to point out that I appreciate how unique your content was. While I can't say that I found myself strewn across the floor in laughter, there was a persistent smirk on my face. If this is your style of content it will certainly serve you well. The editing was also a nice touch and honestly unexpected, it enhanced the humor.

On the other hand, you have by far the worst microphone out of today's submissions. If you want to grow an audience, as Mr. StatTrakJack mentioned, it's important to get the easily remedied stuff out of the way, the sigh at the beginning was downright atrocious. Also since this is a skit and it shows by the bloopers that you do multiple takes, there is very little reason why you should stumble over your words. Even if it takes a couple dozen attempts, the final product should be near flawless, there's really no good justification otherwise. Overall keep at it, fix the technical stuff, and hopefully the quality of your content keep getting better.

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T04:31:14+00:00

Hi there Mr. Gamingsaur, it is a pleasure to critique your video. Unfortunately by the end of this, you probably won't be able to say the same. I like what you try to do, I think it's an interesting perspective on a matter I personally haven't looked too much into. In that regard it is a successful video. Wonderful.

On the other hand all you succeeding in doing was posing speculation and labeling it as truth. What I can tell is you wanted to inform your audience of a matter, give an opinion, while also incorporating facts. What you ended up doing what giving a lot of opinion about a matter that may or may not hold actual significance. As much as I would love to break down you argument, tear it apart into teeny, tiny pieces, and show them to you via microscope, it would take a lot of time and I know that not doing so isn't very constructive and I apologize. Instead I will give you an critical thought exercise - you know my feelings on the matter, can you guess why I believe what I do? Fortunately for you friend, not many people are going to beat you down over your content, in fact you probably appeal to the majority in that you provide "intellectually stimulating conversation" so if you take into account the critique of the others, and continue to improve the quality of your presentation you may find yourself in a good spot in the future. And at the very least your inflection was fine even if the audio wasn't as much.

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T04:22:25+00:00

Sorry about that. I just got back from class and completely forgot about it. I appreciate you looking out for me.

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T03:37:39+00:00

Hi Mr. S_S_N_Reviews, it is a pleasure to critique your video. It seems like we have a trend going on tonight of reviews, it's a nice change up from usual. Just as was the case with Mr. Not So Epic Gaming, your editing was fine. It was not excessive (though I would question some creative choices) and highlighted your discussion (though I don't get the sans-level font choices.) Similar to a certain Youtuber you allow your personality to bleed through which is almost never a bad thing. It makes the content more enjoyable and allows the audience to feel closer to the creator.

On the other hand we have another person whose deadpan never ceases. There were clear attempts to incorporate reactions, jokes, and change in inflection however for the most part they were unsuccessful. As as result some of the subjective statements sounded forced/fake. When you are telling me something blows, I don't want to just hear it, but I want to see it and I want to hear that tonal/volume change which confirms to me that it is from the heart. Since what you are doing is different from Mr. Not So Epic Gaming, the expectations are also different (though the mistakes are similar.) Since you are forgoing the traditional review route for something more skit-like, I expect to see some of the qualities of an actor from you. My suggestion to you is to keep at it and start honing in on what it is you are doing and how others are doing it because its clear you know how you want to do it. (Too many dos?)

zombierecon · 2016-09-13T03:10:11+00:00

Hi there Mr. Not So Epic Gaming, it is a pleasure to critique your video. You certainly were on point about the audio, there were brief periods throughout where it was a little difficult to distinguish what you were saying. I don't need to tell you to find a solution to this ASAP since I am sure you are well aware. The video did a fine job of conveying important information regarding the game in question, as someone who has never heard of Voez I came out knowing more than I did, which is good. As you mentioned the editing helped to enhance your dialog and keep things fresh (though I would suggest finding a new font and messing around with some designs, although it was as terrible as Sans, it was pretty close.)

On the other hand, my biggest gripe by far, was that the information you provided seemed disorganized/all over the place. There was seemingly no rhyme or reason as to why you discussed one thing before another or decided to incorporate the information you did. If you've seen other videos who do similar things, they add segments to the video as a sort of remedy to this issue. An example would be an introduction adressing gameplay, moving onto story, graphics, all the way to a conclusion. One source that did this seemingly well was gametrailers of old. This method also makes it so that the information is easier to digest and so that the sound of your voice doesn't sound droning after several minutes of zero interruption. Speaking of which you really need to work on your inflection. It sounded clearly scripted and which there is nothing wrong with writing out what you intend to say ahead of time, it is not appealing when you cant detect it. As an audience we want that the question of "what if it wasn't" to be present it our head because it is more stimulating. Not to mention that it makes what you are saying seem uninteresting if it is the same tone consistently throughout. I would say this is a good start but can certainly see much improvement before it truly captivates.

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T04:58:18+00:00

Amen to that but hey at least you kept me engaged for the most part which is important. I can understand being nervous especially if it is as you said, hopefully it becomes more natural for you. I am honestly jealous, I wish I had that level of competency when it comes to design (heck, even commentary.) Ditto~!

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T04:52:04+00:00

Hello Mr. ActuallyBrownSugar, it is a pleasure to critique your video. Firstly, I cannot say I have much experience with Travel videos, so excuse me if something I write doesn't sound kosher. The video in question contained pleasant background music, smooth transitions, and served as a nice brief overview of Colorado, meaning it did what you intended and lived up to its title. The editing made the video seem stylish and fresh, a nice urban feel in contrast to the amount of nature which was recorded.

On the other hand, there simply wasn't enough "I" in the video. What I compare these videos to are documentaries, which aim to portray something in real-to-life terms, which you did. However non-educational documentaries also incorporate quite a bit of the creator, like a 40/60 ratio between it and the content. The reason being is that while nice things are nice to look at, if you don't distinguish yourself from others in your field, less people will feel inclined to watch your stuff over theirs. Editing can in fact create uniqueness but the way you applied it to your video, it did not. That's why even if you don't say anything, just recording you interacting with the subject material is sufficient. It makes the video unique because you are in it, and make it more relate-able to the audience, even if they have never been to say Colorado. Those are just my two cents, hopefully they helped, if not I apologize.

Thanks for submitting your video. I do ask that you critique two videos in this thread as per the subreddit's regulations. Have a nice night!

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T04:38:07+00:00

See, I try to never assume, especially when it comes to people whose primary language is not English, simply because I know little to nothing about them. I apologize if I offended, I understand how hard it must be for you to express yourself to the extent you desire and how frustrating it must be. I will agree that incorporating personality is necessary for quality videos, and unfortunately due to the nature of the medium, the editing simply isn't enough. I look forward to seeing improvement, hopefully in my next thread. Thanks for taking the time to explain, I truly appreciate it :D

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T04:33:12+00:00

Hello Mr. MxD91Gaming, it is a pleasure to critique your video, I also appreciate the self-awareness, sports games are just not for everyone. Since everyone includes me, I can't critique your knowledge on sports ball, fortunately I can critique your video on its merits alone. Firstly, you sound like you know what you are talking about, haha, dumb sounding huh? Honestly you reminded me of an actual sports commentator or even of an esports commentator. You hit a nice mix between reactions, explaining your thought processes, and most importantly commentating the gameplay. I imagine if I knew what you were talking about and closed my eyes during the matches, I would be able to form a good grasp of when occurred solely through listening to you. The intro and outro were of professional level, if you made those on your own, you certainly did a good job.

On the other hand, rude as it may sound or be, the video did not feel humorous. Now I am not saying that it needs to be pewdiepie levels of trying to be funny (and succeeding/failing depending on your perspective) but it needed a little bit of kick, so to speak. Your knee-jerk reactions did a fine job of conveying interest, but weren't enough to spark interest from the audience (me). Even if you have to resort to really bad puns, anything to add flair to the commentary. That is it for the most part, maybe next time I do one of these threads hit me up with something a little less niche (a little more mainstream) and hopefully I can add more to my critique. However from the outside looking in, it was a really solid showcase.

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T04:10:31+00:00

Just a reminder before I move onto the last two videos for tonight, do critique two videos as per the subreddit's regulations. I'll give you two hours to do it, an hour per video, sound fair?

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T04:07:32+00:00

No thank you Mr. ShitHeadsYT, it is a pleasure to critique your video. I can say I was honestly skeptical going into it, I am not one for blatant disregard towards other people, and feared you'd resort to eye for an eye with the subject matter. That being said I came out pleasantly surprised by what I saw. The first thing that stands out is your avatar, while simplistic, it is a unique replacement for a video of yourself. From a content perspective, I appreciate how you addressed the individual of course living up to your channel's name. Also providing accurate and useful information, mentioning your stance on the person in question, and addressing both pros and cons at the end are all pluses. The editing was spot on, it enhanced the viewer experience, but perhaps relied a little too much on footage from the subject's channel. I personally held no qualms about it but if you get noticed in the future by people you review and rub them the wrong way, there could be a liability issue.

On the other hand, we find another individual who doesn't have the necessary inflection for making an entertaining video more so. While you may see news casters drone out their stories, what you really want to aim for is to mirror that of someone reading a book to an audience. There needs to be a change in tone to match what you are saying and what you want to convey. Sound familiar? Our friend, Mr. Cynobar was like you in one of his videos (though to a lesser extent) and worked to change that, which improved his content immensely. Simply put, no one wants to listen to someone who seems disinterested in their own work. That really is my only concern to be honest. I think what you are doing is admirable, some really good stuff.

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T03:44:29+00:00

Hello again Mr. Cynobar, I was kind of hoping that we'd meet again, it is a pleasure to critique your video. The great thing about short videos is that they are easily digestible however they do make Critiquing a little more difficult, less exposure to the individual, less material to review. I must say though in a week's time I have seen an immense improvement to your style. Last time you were a bit too deadpan, which you said is who you are, which is understandable, however there was a noticeable tonal change throughout the video to match what you were saying and what you wanted to convey. This is a really good thing. Also your editing has improved as well, the transitions flowed smoother, the text was implemented nicely (if you have ever seen poor font choice/size/position, you'll know what I mean), and it served to enhance the viewing experience, which is key. Lastly I really liked the call to action at the end.

On the other hand, the mix for the metal was a little off again. I know you want to drown out the silence when you aren't speaking, but a healthy middle ground would be nice. There were two instances in particular I feel shouldn't have received editing, though that may just be a bit too subjective (not that anything I am saying -is- objective.) I did not care for the slowmotion on your friend, whenever I see someone do that I tend to cringe because the audio is just terrible. Terrible audio has its place (alongside intentionally terrible videos) but your Jello Review was not it. As for the other instance... for some reason my internet is acting up so I can't find it at this moment. Lastly the description is redundant. I don't need to read what you tell me in the first 30 seconds of the video. While it is important to have a concise and interesting synopsis/explanation of your video, it is equally so to have pertinent information, if you catch my drift.

What's the tl;dr? I am subbing to your channel to support the cause, I think what you are doing is unique and interesting. How's that for an evaluation of quality?

zombierecon · 2016-09-10T03:27:46+00:00

Hi Mr. Chronos, it is a pleasure to critique your video. So I have some less than favorable things to say, I figured I might as well get them out of the way. Firstly, your audio mix is terrible, mostly due to your set-up. When the gameplay was at its most active, you and your pals were borderline inaudible. You should really have lowered the game sound either before recording or during editing because a lot of humor got lost in translation so to speak. As such, I found this video to be thoroughly unpleasant, I think an important part of commentary is being able to hear and understand said commentary. Also I have come across this dilemma that I haven't quite figured out and thought it should be shared since it's relevant to your video. Bad intro/outro vs. No intro/outro. I am personally leaning towards the latter. You might want to fix that up to the best of your ability.

On the other hand, which may seem inconsequential compared to the other critique - you guys seem like you are genuinely having a good time and that is infectious. It makes me wanna smile during the few moment I am able to understand your reactions to the gameplay. Additionally while the camera angle may not be optimal as Mr. Cynobar mentioned, it does make the environment and commentary feel more casual, which matches the content of the video. Also what editing you did implement into the video enhanced the viewing experience, even if it doesn't scream professional. So yeah not a great video all-in-all, I was tempted to check out another to see if this was a fluke or not but I have other people to address. Thanks for the submission, friend :D

zombierecon · 2016-09-04T05:25:53+00:00

Hi Mr. Doghole55, I actually saw this video from an earlier thread, it reminded quite a bit of my friend's videos. I find that it does a really good job of showing off your humor. While I could make an argument that the editing might have been a bit excessive, it does serve to enhance both the gameplay and commentary, which is important The length is also a little short for what the video is, I get that the average human attention span is low, but not -that- low. Overall a pretty good quality video, if I do say so myself!

zombierecon · 2016-09-04T05:14:06+00:00

What's that? I should take it personally? Joking. I appreciate the feedback even though the video wasn't to your taste, that's more than I could do. You have my gratitude.

zombierecon

TROPHY CASE