Geoff Keighley Rips on Interviewer

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#151 Posted by griefersstolemykeyboard (403 posts) -

Is there anything about this Angry Joe guy that isn't completely ridiculous?

#152 Posted by TheHT (12201 posts) -

What a delusional cry-baby. Starts with him explaining his butt-hurtness then explaining how effective he was, calling himself a juggernaut in that interview and how he got under his skin. Dude was totally that guy at the press conference trying to make a point so hard they only hear what they wanna hear.
 
Came off like an amateur fumbling about, uncommitedly trying to practise gotcha journalism in the real world.

#153 Posted by SuperZamrod (280 posts) -

I'm totally with Geoff also.  That angry Joe guy is fucking retarded and Geoff handled him with class.  

#154 Posted by griefersstolemykeyboard (403 posts) -

also why the fuck does he cut like every 5 seconds, its the most annoying thing to watch.

#155 Posted by TheHT (12201 posts) -
@griefersstolemykeyboard: To wipe his tears away? They also bleeped out 'fucking' in the commentary but not in the interview footage. The subtitles also don't match what's being said. He also ended the video twice.
#156 Posted by ArchScabby (5877 posts) -

He wanted to come at him hard, but no he didn't want to do that, although he did want to do it, he didn't want to do it.  Get it?  Cuz I don't.

#157 Posted by I_smell (4212 posts) -

I haven't liked Geoff since I saw him in a Portal 2 interview recently where he asked a load of weird spoilery questions for some reason.
 
But wow this internet moustache dude is fucking horrible. I just remembered I actually love Geoff Kieghley.

#158 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1485 posts) -

Surprised at the amount of people implicitly defending the VGAs, what they stand for, and the corporate shills responsible (ie. Keighley). Do we really want to support the internet celebrities, bimbos and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture?

#159 Posted by Raymayne (1230 posts) -

I love Geoff so much more after watching that, my opinions on the VGA's notwithstanding, he handled that fucking moustachioed moron sublimely, and the douche Joe seriously needs to bone up on his fucking journalism skills if he ever wants to be able to command the respect to warrant a '15 minute sit down interview!!!' with the executive producer of the VGA's, or anyone else in a similar position of authority. He came across as no better than some crazed no-brain fan who just hopped over the barriers to have a little shout at the people behind the 'VGA travesty', absolutely pathetic. Kudos to Geoff.

#160 Posted by Lautaro (454 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" Surprised at the amount of people implicitly defending the VGAs, what they stand for, and the corporate shills responsible (ie. Keighley). Do we really want to support the internet celebrities, bimbos and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture? "
Angry Joe didn't go about it the right way, had he brought up those very valid points you mention in an intelligent manner then I would listen to what he has to say.
#161 Posted by Apathylad (3234 posts) -
#162 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8504 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" Surprised at the amount of people implicitly defending the VGAs, what they stand for, and the corporate shills responsible (ie. Keighley). Do we really want to support the internet celebrities, bimbos and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture? "
This.  THIS.  THIS!
#163 Posted by Geno (6768 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow said:
" @owl_of_minerva said:
" Surprised at the amount of people implicitly defending the VGAs, what they stand for, and the corporate shills responsible (ie. Keighley). Do we really want to support the internet celebrities, bimbos and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture? "
This.  THIS.  THIS! "
It's not so much that we're defending the VGAs (I imagine most of us hate it as much as ever) as it is we're facepalming at the utter incompetence of this interviewer, and how pretentious and oblivious he must be to actually make a video such as this. Like I said earlier, Angry Joe is more of an insult to hardcore gamers than the VGAs he's trying to attack. All he did was worsen the cause of those that actually have serious, well-formed criticisms of the VGAs. 
#164 Posted by BabyChooChoo (5123 posts) -
@Geno said:
" @SeriouslyNow said:
" @owl_of_minerva said:
" Surprised at the amount of people implicitly defending the VGAs, what they stand for, and the corporate shills responsible (ie. Keighley). Do we really want to support the internet celebrities, bimbos and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture? "
This.  THIS.  THIS! "
It's not so much that we're defending the VGAs (I imagine most of us hate it as much as ever) as it is we're facepalming at the utter incompetence of this interviewer, and how pretentious and oblivious he must be to actually make a video such as this. Like I said earlier, Angry Joe is more of an insult to hardcore gamers than the VGAs he's trying to attack. All he did was worsen the cause of those that actually have serious, well-formed criticisms of the VGAs.  "
Thank you. The last thing we need if we want to 'move gaming forward' is Angry Joe. He is such a joke that he doesn't even know it. What's worse though, is that people view him as 'the only credible reviewer left.' He's like a child that throws a tantrum when things don't go his way. The quicker he goes away, the better it is for all of us.
#165 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1485 posts) -
@Geno: One blogger isn't going to affect the cause one way or another; what you're saying is not only exaggerated but irrelevant. Viewer numbers, celebrities, and the other tired bullshit surrounding TV award shows is clearly what they're invested in and thanks to asshats like Keighley they're happy to pick on weak opposition in order to make their naysayers look foolish.
#166 Posted by mnzy (2959 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" Surprised at the amount of people implicitly defending the VGAs, what they stand for, and the corporate shills responsible (ie. Keighley). Do we really want to support the internet celebrities, bimbos and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture? "
Untermenschen? Really?
Online
#167 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1485 posts) -
@mnzy:  I get Nietzsche flashbacks when confronted by a spectacle as sorry as the VGAs. Replace it with whatever term of contempt suits your liberal sensibilties.
#168 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8553 posts) -

I think angry joe is over reacting. Geoff actually answered all of his questions, didn't lose his temper and heard his points. I don't know what's the deal with this angry joe character, however I thought he was very unprofessional and he over reacted and made a mountain out of a mole hill. I side with geoff here, who knows, he might be very busy at that day.

#169 Posted by Geno (6768 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" @Geno: One blogger isn't going to affect the cause one way or another; what you're saying is not only exaggerated but irrelevant. Viewer numbers, celebrities, and the other tired bullshit surrounding TV award shows is clearly what they're invested in and thanks to asshats like Keighley they're happy to pick on weak opposition in order to make their naysayers look foolish. "
First of all I think it's improper to make a personal attack on Keighley; he hasn't done anything overtly wrong. He was a host at Gametrailers and other wrote for other gaming publications from early on and his career has naturally shifted in this direction, he's just trying to earn a living like everyone else.  
 
Secondly, you contradict yourself when you say "one blogger isn't going to affect the cause one way or another" and then follow up almost immediately with "Keighley picks on weak opposition in order to make their naysayers look foolish". Who is looking foolish and what would be the point if "it doesn't affect the cause one way or another"?
 
Finally, I'm going to reiterate that nobody here is supporting the VGAs; it's a demonstration of poor reading comprehension to think so. You seem to have formed some false dichotomy in your mind where if someone isn't attacking the VGAs then they must be supporting them.
#170 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11874 posts) -

This Angry Joe guy (who I have never heard of) seems like an ass. Also, it's hard to take a guy who calls himself "Angry Joe" seriously. 

#171 Posted by rjayb89 (7806 posts) -

Joe should work here so we can all hate one person together rather than hating Alex, Brad, Leigh, or Vinny's wife (for taking away that sexy piece of meat from all of us).

#172 Posted by mnzy (2959 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" @mnzy:  I get Nietzsche flashbacks when confronted by a spectacle as sorry as the VGAs. Replace it with whatever term of contempt suits your liberal sensibilties. "
I'm not liberal. Just a little sensible when it comes to Nazi-lingo. If you are refering to Nietzsche, ok.
Online
#173 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1485 posts) -
@Geno:  It's an attempt to make their naysayers look foolish, or I don't see the point, it would just be Keighley being an asshole , which he might very well be. And to some extent the dichotomisation (Angry Joe vs. SpikeTV) has worked in people's minds, just look at this thread dude. I don't think it will have a significant impact, but if it does, then it is less through the fault of Angry Joe rather than a clearly manipulated situation: Keighley is experienced at such things as a professional shill, Joe is not. Were you blind to Keighley's tone, body language, explicitly insulting comments (yeah you just post on Youtube), etc.? 
 
And I'm not supporting a dichotomy, just pointing out that people attacking Angry Joe are being duped into it by the antics of Keighley, which implicitly supports his position.
#174 Posted by zudthespud (3326 posts) -

Whether or not Joe was being a dickhead doesn't make Keighley any less of one, making him do an interview there, well, he may as well have just slapped him round the face with his wang. 

#175 Posted by Cramsy (1201 posts) -

That joe guy is fucking annoying 

#176 Posted by Geno (6768 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva: The problem, again, isn't the VGA's or Keighley. The subject can effectively be devoid of any mention of the VGAs and it would be the same. The problem is the total unpreparedness by the interviewer (and further, his oblivious and pretentious hissy fit after the fact). You'd be hard pressed to find a bigger detractor of the VGAs than myself but frankly even I would've given Angry Joe the same treatment or worse, even though we are in the same camp. He was simply clueless.  
 
His goal was to represent the hardcore gamer's stance and maybe even initiate some change as to how the VGAs are conducted but he didn't even remotely accomplish either, on the contrary he backfired hard and made us look bad. All the while, Geoff responded not with rhetoric or debasement (not primarily anyway), but with cold, hard, facts. AJ tried to make a talking point of Mountain-Dew sponsored indie games, he was shut down with facts. AJ tried to make a talking point about why there appeared to be so many music categories, shut down with facts again (he apparently couldn't contrast to himself the difference between "Best Original Score" and "Best Music Game"). He asked why there wasn't an MMO category and then when asked what sorts of games he'd nominate he mentioned "that Final Fantasy MMO"; FF14, universally reviled by the hardcore audience. FF13, if referred to for the RPG category, isn't a much better candidate. AJ tried to make a talking point about how the voting is rigged, Geoff shut him down with the facts once again by saying it was public knowledge who the judges are. In the interview and questionings, it was apparent that Geoff knew much more about games and the industry than AJ, so Geoff was able to flip AJ onto his back not out of spite, but simply out of mere consequence. He didn't "manipulate" Joe, he directly answered all of his questions with facts, it was simply that Joe's questions were so dumb or irrelevant that the mere action of answering them naturally delivered am impression of stupidity on Joe.  
 
Moral of the Story: VGAs are evil and do not represent hardcore gamers, but AJ's incompetence represents hardcore gamers even less. Geoff dealt with the situation I think the same as anyone else including myself would have if dealing with a complete idiot.
#177 Posted by I_smell (4212 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" and other vacuous untermenschen lampreying onto our fine gamer culture? "
Is this sentence a fucking joke?
#178 Posted by Vitor (3076 posts) -
@Diamond said:
" Eh, I think Angry Joe is too full of himself.  Keighley might be a jerk too, but Angry Joe definitely expected too much.  I don't really care for Angry Joe, he's just another of those gaming media people who are more concerned with being popular than providing a quality commentary or service to his watchers. "
Yeah, agreed. 
 
Jeff came off as a bit of a jerk in terms of how unprofessional he appeared and some of the backhanded comments he made but, it's easy to defend yourself in a video after the fact - Joe was indeed unprepared, expecting too much and behaved rather amateurishly throughout. Neither of them come out great from that video.  
 
Plus, to be honest, Jeff had an awards show to produce and it's undeniable that, while still awful, the VGAs have improved greatly every year since he took over. 
#179 Posted by owl_of_minerva (1485 posts) -
@Geno:   Fact: Joe prepared for a 15-minute sitdown interview. He was given a few minutes outside the red carpet.
Fact: Keighley was looking away from him for most of the interview, which if I had to guess would make it difficult to interview him. As well as crowd noise, etc.
Fact: Joe was waiting for ages before that interview because clearly Keighley had no intention of honouring it.
Fact: He was clearly hurrying Joe from the start in order to trip him up more.
Fact: He was willing to lie about FFIV's release date, in order to shut down an otherwise valid question. Just because it's a bad game doesn't mean it isn't technically a candidate, it just shouldn't be nominated.
 Fact: He had a condescending expression the entire interview, and his body language was dismissive from the start.
Fact: Joe is a blogger, he isn't some kind of professional interviewer, nor does he make claims about his exceptional knowledge regarding games. He represents some gamers though, surely the ones that follow him on his site. 
Fact: He was bad-mannering Joe from the start with his derogatory remark about Youtube videos, which isn't exactly true. The dude has his own website and is part of the That Guy with the Glasses group, make of that what you will. If I were Joe I would've punched the smarmy fuck, not interviewed him.
 
So yes, there was considerable manipulation, in order to ensure that the quality of questioning was much worse than it likely could have been. The questions as given were shit, but I imagine the material Joe had prepared (the sheets of paper you can see in his hand) might have been rather better. i could see some valid points in what he was saying: is there too much corporate shilling and an over-emphasis on celebrities and sponsors that have nothing to do with gaming? Obviously, doesn't fucking matter if there's some Mountain Dew category or not. Is there a neglect of PC gaming in favour of consoles? It seems so.  Is the process as transparent as Keighley claims? No, the info isn't on their site or it's so buried that it's impossible to find. The press were asking some of the exact same questions.
 
In that environment I'm not surprised Joe wasn't able to subject him to more probing criticism. Put on the spot like that, he floundered. You've managed to completely ignore the human factor. It's annoying having to defend this guy in such detail, but you have such a lack of understanding regarding how humanity functions and such a pedantic obsession with facts that you seem like you have some kind of autism. I'm not saying you do, but your focus is very single-minded.
#180 Posted by SeriouslyNow (8504 posts) -

The VGA's do, however, support a kind of brash showmanship which manipulates the games industry as a whole as many people who watch them may not understand just how varied the selection of games can be beyond what's marketed heavily.  The voting is rigged, just not in the conspiratorial context which asinine commentators like Joe tend to imply.  It's rigged based on what marketing schemes are in place and what franchises have the most to gain from the notoriety of being nominated or winning (the delineation is very slight) into the next year.  It's a bullshit spectacle of the highest order and frankly, if Keighly is that interested in actually raising the profile of gaming as he purports to be then the VGAs need to cover a lot more than just what's being marketed heavily at the time.  An Indie games 'segment' isn't enough.  Joe's right to question the lack of MMO awards and just because one major MMO released this year was a failure that doesn't detract from the countless others which have been regularly ignored as a genre each previous year.   
 
They are not the VGAs, they are the CGAs (heh) with a dash of Indie.

#181 Posted by Sir_Loin_of_Beef (61 posts) -

Yeah because im sure that the majority of people making abusive comments about Joe's behavior wouldn't act the exact same way after being ignored, put on the back burner and not being taken seriously as a videogame critic, right? THAT my friends is dissrespect, now stop it with all the 'I hate Joe' boo hoo hoo wah wah wah *rubs eyes* nonsense   :P

#182 Posted by gamefreak9 (2733 posts) -
@SeriouslyNow:  
On the other hand, this is a good step, its what the movie awards do too, w/e was most popular, or some shit like that. You can't expect VGA to be different. I've actually never heard of the VGA's b4 and i gotta say its cool how we are on the way to commercialization. 
#183 Posted by Belmont_Shadow (191 posts) -

LOL @ FFXIV MMO thing. Geoff knows FFXIV came out but it was so DAMN terrible he was sarcastically ignore it.

#184 Posted by Geno (6768 posts) -
@owl_of_minerva said:
" @Geno:   Fact: Joe prepared for a 15-minute sitdown interview. He was given a few minutes outside the red carpet.
Fact: Keighley was looking away from him for most of the interview, which if I had to guess would make it difficult to interview him. As well as crowd noise, etc.
Fact: Joe was waiting for ages before that interview because clearly Keighley had no intention of honouring it.
Fact: He was clearly hurrying Joe from the start in order to trip him up more.
Fact: He was willing to lie about FFIV's release date, in order to shut down an otherwise valid question. Just because it's a bad game doesn't mean it isn't technically a candidate, it just shouldn't be nominated.  Fact: He had a condescending expression the entire interview, and his body language was dismissive from the start.Fact: Joe is a blogger, he isn't some kind of professional interviewer, nor does he make claims about his exceptional knowledge regarding games. He represents some gamers though, surely the ones that follow him on his site.  Fact: He was bad-mannering Joe from the start with his derogatory remark about Youtube videos, which isn't exactly true. The dude has his own website and is part of the That Guy with the Glasses group, make of that what you will. If I were Joe I would've punched the smarmy fuck, not interviewed him.  So yes, there was considerable manipulation, in order to ensure that the quality of questioning was much worse than it likely could have been. The questions as given were shit, but I imagine the material Joe had prepared (the sheets of paper you can see in his hand) might have been rather better. i could see some valid points in what he was saying: is there too much corporate shilling and an over-emphasis on celebrities and sponsors that have nothing to do with gaming? Obviously, doesn't fucking matter if there's some Mountain Dew category or not. Is there a neglect of PC gaming in favour of consoles? It seems so.  Is the process as transparent as Keighley claims? No, the info isn't on their site or it's so buried that it's impossible to find. The press were asking some of the exact same questions. In that environment I'm not surprised Joe wasn't able to subject him to more probing criticism. Put on the spot like that, he floundered. You've managed to completely ignore the human factor. It's annoying having to defend this guy in such detail, but you have such a lack of understanding regarding how humanity functions and such a pedantic obsession with facts that you seem like you have some kind of autism. I'm not saying you do, but your focus is very single-minded. "
All that would be valid complaints if, again, it weren't for the fact that Joe was completely clueless. If he had some legitimately good questions why didn't he ask them first? Why wouldn't he have suggested WoW: Cataclysm as an example for the MMO category instead of worst-RPG-released-in-recent-memory FF14 (and Geoff didn't lie about the release date, he was merely aghast that someone would nominate FF14 for best MMO)? And in the media circle the people that asked such questions were more than likely from the mainstream press (i.e. such questions should have been known by someone who's supposedly a hardcore gamer). For instance Jeff (Gerstmann) and other journalists on other sites have often mentioned judging for the VGAs, and the voting channels from regular gamers are also available both on gametrailers.com and spike.com. If AJ was even remotely familiar with hardcore gaming he would be aware of this, and not ask such a stupid question as to how the voting is done.  
 
Geoff was condescending and dismissive because from early on it was apparent that Joe was an idiot. As fake and vapid as the VGAs are, and as much as you may think that Geoff is a shill, they are still better than gamers of Joe's caliber in terms of representing the hardcore (we at least got a few trailers out of it, what did we get out of Joe other than facepalms?). I actually think Geoff was patient with Joe, had I been in Geoff's shoes I would've been even less so (and again, this is even with Joe and I having the same general position regarding the VGAs).  
 
So yes, Joe was hurried along and ignored during the interview process, which was wrong, but apparently it was justified in the end since as observed through the video evidence, he was a waste of time in every respect. Someone who doesn't do his research and feigns to speak for hardcore gamers is not someone deserving of being defended. 
 
So I don't see how I'm being single-minded here. Joe was an embarrassment (and given the above likely a poser as well due to his lack of knowledge), Geoff acted accordingly. Pretty much open and shut case. 
#185 Posted by Egg0 (178 posts) -

I'd be annoyed too if I was being interviewed by a dude name "Angry Joe."
#186 Posted by ProfessorEss (7648 posts) -

 I feel kinda bad for him, but I think all this does is show that maybe Angry Joe is not cut out for this line of work.
 
I'm fine with people who want to employ an aggressive interview style, but you have to be ready to give it and ready to take it. You can't just walk in there, attack someone, and then throw your hands up in frustration when they return your serve. He wanted to be the aggressor and make Jeff defend himself, Jeff flipped it and Joe wasn't prepared for this.
 
Anyways, this was an opportunity for Joe, not for Jeff, and I'd say he blew it. Gloriously.

#187 Posted by FritzDude (2316 posts) -

Im with Joe on this. If you guys watched many of his videos, you would know that he is an honest guy that likes Giant Bomb, and uses the whole score-scale for reviews. He dont follow the game-hype and gives honest opinions about it, and he is really talented and knows how to interact with others, though in this video he got punched really hard with questions to a question by Geoff.  The only reason why Geoff didn't care for Joe was because he started out saying "i have a bone to pick with this guy". Just watch Geoff's reaction when he says it. But Joe was told to get a sit-down interview with questions for like 10-15 minutes, but at the last minute he got a 2 minutes inerview. That's foul i think. And seriously guys... You calling Joe by names without knowing this dude. I feel ashamed by this community.

#188 Posted by ZeForgotten (10368 posts) -

They both made mistakes.  
Joe is really full of himself though, just watch some of all the other stuff he has done.  
He's the black sheep of TGWTG. And the most annoying one too

#189 Posted by stinky (1563 posts) -

ugh, couldn't make it all the way through that video. 
how anyone likes 'angry joe" is beyond me. 
 
why would the geoff guy want to spend time with someone trying to market themselves. 
 when interviewing someone, don't become a character, its rude. 

#190 Posted by General_D23 (1210 posts) -
@ProfessorEss said:
"  I feel kinda bad for him, but I think all this does is show that maybe Angry Joe is not cut out for this line of work.   I'm fine with people who want to employ an aggressive interview style, but you have to be ready to give it and ready to take it. You can't just walk in there, attack someone, and then throw your hands up in frustration when they return your serve. He wanted to be the aggressor and make Jeff defend himself, Jeff flipped it and Joe wasn't prepared for this. Anyways, this was an opportunity for Joe, not for Jeff, and I'd say he blew it. Gloriously. "
Have to agree with this. Interviewers that do choose to go aggressive have to be prepared for when interviewees bite back. "Angry Joe" wasn't, apparently.
#191 Posted by Cretaceous_Bob (535 posts) -

I've been familiar with Angry Joe; his stuff seemed okay, but never that great. He's just shattered all respect. He seems to have the word "angry" mixed up with "sensitive". There's a reason that's a 20 minute video that's practically 1/4th actual footage of what happened. He has to pad it to colour your impression of events before he even lets you see what happened.   
 
If I were Joe, I would have deleted that footage out of embarrassment for my behavior and resolved to learn a lesson from that experience. But not him. Sensitive nerd-jerks stick to their guns. 

#192 Posted by Belmont_Shadow (191 posts) -
@stinky: 
 
He isn't a professional jounalist but he does make some DAMN good funny reviews. Go watch his Sonic free riders review . That's what he's good for, not this.
#193 Posted by jonnyboy (2867 posts) -

A microphone with an idiot on both ends, no good can come from this.

#194 Posted by CptBedlam (4466 posts) -

Wow, that Joe guy sure is embarrassing.
 
The last thing you need minutes before a show is an angry guy who talks down the event and starts a discussion about what is wrong with your show. Jeff sure was pretty busy that day and he even offered him to have a talk later on.
 
And come on, it's pretty well known for years who how the winners are chosen at the VGAs.

#195 Posted by Bloodgraiv3 (2728 posts) -

I don't like either of them. 
#196 Posted by ShiftyMagician (2160 posts) -
@ZeForgotten said:
" They both made mistakes.  Joe is really full of himself though, just watch some of all the other stuff he has done.  He's the black sheep of TGWTG. And the most annoying one too "
Funny enough I kind of agree with this.  To some extent I enjoy the Spoony One's stuff merely for the humour when he hits it (not all the time though as sometimes it can be quite a bit much for my taste).  At times that guy also makes good points that I can agree with (though never with that much extremism).  However, I could never get into how Angry Joe does his stuff.  A shame that he failed in this particular interview, and hoping that he learns from this well at the very least.
 
Also, @Geno said:
" All that would be valid complaints if, again, it weren't for the fact that Joe was completely clueless. If he had some legitimately good questions why didn't he ask them first? Why wouldn't he have suggested WoW: Cataclysm as an example for the MMO category instead of worst-RPG-released-in-recent-memory FF14 (and Geoff didn't lie about the release date, he was merely aghast that someone would nominate FF14 for best MMO)?"
Even though I understood your opinion and owl_of_minerva's opinion, did you just suggest to nominate an expansion to an already released game from years ago for MMO of the year?  That is my only gripe, as that idea makes no sense to me.  Other than that, nice opinions on this issue when people aren't just typing knee-jerk reactions and actually break it down.
 
My stance on it all - Angry Joe should have conducted better even with the sudden change of plans and the scenario he was put in.  If you do an interview at all, you don't interview as if it was an uninteresting project for school.  You take time, respect the person you have opposing views with and ask the tough questions whilst allowing the interviewee to speak his/her mind.  The public can figure out when someone's bullshitting just fine after hearing the interview, then comparing it to the facts that are out where available.  At least the well-minded portion of the public at least hehehe.
 
Also I agree with everyone when they say the name "Angry Joe" isn't a name you want to hear as the name of the guy that will suddenly interview you out of nowhere in such circumstances, regardless of how good or bad your personality or knowledge is.  Not for being concerned for being cornered intellectually, but for expecting to be bothered and blatantly attacked just for reactions.
#197 Posted by FCKSNAP (2337 posts) -
@ShiftyMagician said:   
Also, @Geno said:
" All that would be valid complaints if, again, it weren't for the fact that Joe was completely clueless. If he had some legitimately good questions why didn't he ask them first? Why wouldn't he have suggested WoW: Cataclysm as an example for the MMO category instead of worst-RPG-released-in-recent-memory FF14 (and Geoff didn't lie about the release date, he was merely aghast that someone would nominate FF14 for best MMO)?"
Even though I understood your opinion and owl_of_minerva's opinion, did you just suggest to nominate an expansion to an already released game from years ago for MMO of the year?  That is my only gripe, as that idea makes no sense to me.  
Even though it's just an expansion, what MMO came out this year on PC that was actually successful?
#198 Posted by DreDavis (43 posts) -

I think that the greatest part of this is that Angry Joe rants about Geoff K. being a douche, but his video on the subject clearly shows that he's an incredible ass. Also an uninformed ass. Half of the time he's ranting about stuff he doesn't know a thing about.

#199 Posted by Berserk007 (224 posts) -

Joe is a great guy who is  passionate about what he does and tries to come at his reviews from a real gamer perspective and you have to give it to him that he doesn't lob softball questions. I love how when the internet see's anybody new for the first time the first reaction is to shit all over them. I imagine more than a few of you shit all over Giantbomb until you finally migrated over from whatever other gaming site you called home.   Geoff Keighley looks like a complete corporate douche bag doing his impression of Tucker Carlson with his nose in the air looking down on anyone not in a bowtie.

#200 Posted by Geno (6768 posts) -
@ShiftyMagician said:
Even though I understood your opinion and owl_of_minerva's opinion, did you just suggest to nominate an expansion to an already released game from years ago for MMO of the year?  

Or an equivalent (Cataclysm I think is a large enough expansion to justify such a nomination but he could've also gone for the new, high quality and well known MMOs like Allods Online, Mabinogi Heroes, etc.); the point was he mentioned by far the -worst- MMO out there at the moment as a candidate for a proposed MMO of the year category - something a hardcore gamer wouldn't do almost out of muscle reflex. And he does so with little reservation or afterthought - even after the fact when he's doing his analysis, which suggests that he isn't even aware why Geoff reacted the way he did to his suggestion for FF14 to be included in a Best MMO category. His claims of being a hardcore gamer are highly suspect given the knowledge, or lack thereof he displayed in his video. 

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.