Patrick on the Just Talking Podcast

  • 71 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by Animasta (14650 posts) -

@ThePaleKing said:

@SirOptimusPrime said:

@ThePaleKing said:

A bunch of articles that just regurgitate information from other sources and present in a safe and neutral manner that appeals to the community would be so incredibly mind numbingly boring.

And we had that. And his name was Brad Nicholson, and people gave him shit for not having an opinion and regurgitating information... whereas the community now gives Patrick shit for having aggressive opinions. Something they do not hold against Jeff, Alex, Ryan, or Brad on a daily basis.

note: I'm agreeing with you. Hard to convey via text :D

Yeah, that is a main point of why I get so aggravated. Jeff in particular is extremely opinionated (I mean he got Syndicate on the top 10 of the year list, with barely any discussion, and I hate the game but I love him for that), but there is no outcry over that, whereas everyone jumps on Patrick for it.

and they jump on Patrick for writing useless articles but everyone thought the article about Triple H's hair was fantastic.

#52 Posted by SirOptimusPrime (1958 posts) -

Y'know, I just had this thought. Vinny is pretty much the dad of the site, trying to get everyone to play together nicely...

What the fuck would the community do if he suddenly got super pissed at them for all of this in-fighting? Could he, like, put the egregious defenders and haters into some kind of video jail? Would the site implode, or would people get real "dad yelled at me" feelings and just slink off?

IMPORTANT QUESTIONS.

#53 Edited by Alekss (327 posts) -

@PixelPrinny said:

@Alekss said:

@Animasta said:

@Alekss said:

@Animasta said:

but hey unjustified resentment is cool too!

Are you saying I have unjustified resentment? I have many reasons to dislike him. I don't start attacking him tho...

you just insinuated that Patrick places all the blame on people not liking him on other people when he is well aware of his faults, because people like you tell him constantly, and he is perfectly humble about it (I know this because I've read his twitter/formspring/tumblr/whatever)

all of them have faults, but none of them are brought up as much as Patrick's are.

And I think he does. I am convinced he believes that the reason people disagreed with him on the sexism subject is because they are imature and sexist, but he will never say that. Some people were obviously imature in the way they reacted but not all of them.

Also, his sharp whine he does when he gets excited in the middle of a quick look pierces thru my ears.

It's 'immature', not 'imature'. Just saying you might wanna actually know how to spell something (or at least learn how to use the in-browser spellchecker) before you call someone out for it. Otherwise, you look like an uneducated twat whose argument shouldn't be taken seriously.

English is not my native tongue. How many languages do you know?

You should also stop calling people that disagree with you twats. It makes you look like a 12 year old.

#54 Posted by Undeadpool (4913 posts) -

@joshthebear: SAAAAAAH-WEEEEEEEEEEET!

#55 Posted by fodigga (123 posts) -

@mrfluke said:

to the very least what im trying to say is his style of writing could definitely improve and would draw less ire from people. just look at the guns of navarro articles as an example of articles that the community adores., its an opinionated piece, but alex takes a lot more neutral tone than the agressive opinion shoving tone that i think comes off in patricks writing. and the community loves alex's articles.

The difference here is that in Alex's articles he isn't really touching on the divisive issues like Patrick has been in those few articles that seemed to escalate this shitstorm. Apart from maybe the gun violence edition of The Guns of Navarro, those articles have been mostly observations presented through Alex's point of view and don't really have the potential of starting this war of words between anyone. Whereas Patrick has written about actual issues, things in which there is a fiery debate already happening and Patrick is attempting to allow some people to see one under represented side of the argument.

I don't think you can say that one writer should be like the other because the aim of these articles has been completely different.

#56 Posted by mrfluke (5102 posts) -

@SirOptimusPrime said:

@mrfluke: I don't think he has to cover all of his grounds, though. That implies that he's going to be pandering to a reader's opinion by essentially saying "imo" at the end of every one of his sentences. If he starts doing that, then the validity of his opinions goes down the tubes because he wants to play it "safe." He should say what he wants and not worry about the opposing opinion unless he wants to interact with the comment.

That's fine and dandy that the community loves Alex and his articles, but Patrick is not Alex and he shouldn't have to insert a shitty witticism or snarky comment just so people like him more. I don't understand this argument against him having an aggressive opinion, like at all. GiantBomb IS opinions, and especially polarizing ones.

@ThePaleKing said:

A bunch of articles that just regurgitate information from other sources and present in a safe and neutral manner that appeals to the community would be so incredibly mind numbingly boring.

And we had that. And his name was Brad Nicholson, and people gave him shit for not having an opinion and regurgitating information... whereas the community now gives Patrick shit for having aggressive opinions. Something they do not hold against Jeff, Alex, Ryan, or Brad on a daily basis.

note: I'm agreeing with you. Hard to convey via text :D

this is just my perspective, patrick does articles like the sexism one, to foster discussion ( he even says this, if it wasnt so buried in formspring or tumblr id link it and show you),, there was definitely discussion going on there, but a good percentage of those comments were people essentially bitching,

the guns of navarro articles have been getting in my opinion 95% of its audience to take part in sharing their discussion, and there was very little bitching.

im not talking about pandering to readers and putting imo a lot\, im saying to acknowledge the other side of an argument, which was a decent part of the criticism people yell at him for.

and did you read the guns of navarro articles? alex doesnt do none of that of what your saying on those articles, he does it when he puts up a trailer or in a review, but those last 2 guns of navarro pieces were written seriously i thought., and alex was hated on quite a lot, even when patrick came on board, people didnt like alex, go look at the comments on the pax panels he was on, but again, observing the reaction to the guns of navarro articles, people have come around greatly on alex.

#57 Posted by Benny (1947 posts) -

I love that y'all opened this can of worms in this thread. Just goes to show how large a factor having an audience for this crap really is.

#58 Edited by mrfluke (5102 posts) -

@thebroken said:

@mrfluke said:

to the very least what im trying to say is his style of writing could definitely improve and would draw less ire from people. just look at the guns of navarro articles as an example of articles that the community adores., its an opinionated piece, but alex takes a lot more neutral tone than the agressive opinion shoving tone that i think comes off in patricks writing. and the community loves alex's articles.

The difference here is that in Alex's articles he isn't really touching on the divisive issues like Patrick has been in those few articles that seemed to escalate this shitstorm. Apart from maybe the gun violence edition of The Guns of Navarro, those articles have been mostly observations presented through Alex's point of view and don't really have the potential of starting this war of words between anyone. Whereas Patrick has written about actual issues, things in which there is a fiery debate already happening and Patrick is attempting to allow some people to see one under represented side of the argument.

I don't think you can say that one writer should be like the other because the aim of these articles has been completely different.

seeing one side of an argument is fine, but not even getting the other side of the industry's opinion (the people that in fact pull heavy authority in the industry) and then passing it off by generalizing and saying the assholes in that comment section speak for the other side is another.

everyone has their opinions, my opinion is this (feel free to disagree as its your opinion) , i think to foster discussion about a hotly debated issue and to draw less ire and get more people to listen, the two sides of an argument should be represented, that way your audience gets an idea of what the 2 sides think and then they form their own opinion.

#59 Posted by PassiveKaerenai (326 posts) -

I'm beginning to suspect that the GB community has a massive homoerotic crush on Patrick, everybody waiting for the day where he reads their particular little criticism and goes: 'Oh xxxsInArkangel13, you were right, you were right all along', and changes his writing style JUST FOR YOU <3

There's nothing wrong with it. This is a safe place. Just let it all out.

#60 Edited by chrissedoff (2075 posts) -

@SirOptimusPrime: It comes down to the sexism issue, in my opinion. Some men and boys feel threatened when presented with the possibility that the media they consume may contribute to creating simplistic or even negative images of women. It kind of sucks to be reminded that simply by being born a man, they've inherited a legacy of thousands of years of privilege. This necessitates analysis of some aspects of our culture from alternative points of view so that we can root out all the nasty little remaining artifacts of a totally hetero-white-male-society. But nobody likes to think there's something wrong with the way they go about their lives and that they need to change, so a lot of people would rather yell at anyone trying to diagnose the problem.

If the people griping about Patrick's opinion articles succeeded, ultimately all they would really accomplish would be to ensure that the "gaming community" would be an immature boys' club where minority views are drowned out. A large segment of the GB community needs to get on board with the idea that Patrick (or any of the other writers on staff) are allowed to express unpopular opinions and get hip to the possibility that the video game industry might have some moral blind spots that need to be addressed, because a lot of people seem to cling to the status quo by default.

#61 Posted by Phatmac (5723 posts) -

I'm not here to start a fight so don't kill me!!! I liked the podcast and I continue to like Patrick. He sounds/acts like a great guy.

#62 Posted by CommodoreGroovy (549 posts) -

Might check out this podcast later, but I'd just like to say that I think Patrick is a pretty cool duder. I really enjoy checking out his Worth Reading posts every week. They're one of my Friday highlights.

#63 Posted by NoelVeiga (1074 posts) -

@chrissedoff said:

@SirOptimusPrime: It comes down to the sexism issue, in my opinion. Some men and boys feel threatened when presented with the possibility that the media they consume may contribute to creating simplistic or even negative images of women. It kind of sucks to be reminded that simply by being born a man, they've inherited a legacy of thousands of years of privilege. This necessitates analysis of some aspects of our culture from alternative points of view so that we can root out all the nasty little remaining artifacts of a totally hetero-white-male-society. But nobody likes to think there's something wrong with the way they go about their lives and that they need to change, so a lot of people would rather yell at anyone trying to diagnose the problem.

If the people griping about Patrick's opinion articles succeeded, ultimately all they would really accomplish would be to ensure that the "gaming community" would be an immature boys' club where minority views are drowned out. A large segment of the GB community needs to get on board with the idea that Patrick (or any of the other writers on staff) are allowed to express unpopular opinions and get hip to the possibility that the video game industry might have some moral blind spots that need to be addressed, because a lot of people seem to cling to the status quo by default.

Yep.

But also, getting into that rabbit hole places you under a sort of scrutiny that is very harsh. Same with games as art, same with game making as a craft, and Patrick is into all of those. Ultimately, Patrick is who he is. He *can* be annoying. He does snort when he laughs. He isn't as intuitive or analytical or naturally well spoken as, say Ryan... he'd get a lot more of a pass on those things if he didn't get into areas where gamers think their little toy box is being threatened, though.

Ultimately, I like the guy. He means well, we share a lot of interests within the gaming industry and a lot of the unfair crap thrown his way actually makes me root for him and his very proactive and energetic approach to his likes and dislikes.

#64 Posted by triple07 (1196 posts) -

Interesting podcast. Always wondered what he thought of the hate he gets and it was interesting to hear him talk about it. I like that he talked about actually taking some of the criticism to heart which is always good since everyone need improvement and I do think he has some things to work on.

#65 Posted by JasonR86 (9611 posts) -

It was pretty good. I get where Patrick is coming from with his articles and I know he's trying to do the best he can when he writes about topics. My issue with his editorials is that they are very one-sided. Which is what he said he was going for with most of them (minus the 8 women piece which I thought was pretty good). So I guess I can't fault him for doing what he set out to do. I guess in the end I'm looking for discussions on these topics that might be outside the scope of this site or what Patrick is able to do. It is very hard to have a well-rounded article on issues like sexism with several sides are represented. I get that. But that is what I personally want which makes Patrick's articles on such topics inherently less interesting to me. I'm not really interested in hearing Patrick's opinions on a topic alone or even with a bunch of like minded people. I want to hear Patrick's opinion with the opinions of people who look at the topic differently (and not even necessarily disagreeing with Patrick but seeing it from a different perspective).

All the guys on GB seem like good dudes. Most people from most sites, gaming or otherwise, seem like good people. Even when I've vehemently disagree with Patrick that doesn't mean I dislike him. I disagree with a lot of people who I think are good people behind their opinions. Obama, for example, is a person who I disagree with on a lot of topics. That doesn't mean that I think he's a bad guy. It's unfortunate that online people have this tendency to equate a person's quality of character with their opinions. There are many, many sides to a person. There are opinions Patrick holds that I don't agree with. That doesn't mean I dislike Patrick as a person because there are many aspects of who he is I think are kind, well-meaning, and genuine.

#66 Posted by JackSukeru (5906 posts) -

Cool and interesting podcast. It's always nice to see any one of the guys be on other stuff or talk seriously about a topic with someone outside the site.

Much respect to Patrick for that interview.

#67 Edited by wumbo3000 (942 posts) -

I freaking love Patrick. Probably the one of the most transparent and realest motherfuckers on the site. Great listen.

#68 Posted by Cerevisiae (75 posts) -

I'm kind of new around here. Why do people hate Patrick? He seems like a decent fellow to me.

#69 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4164 posts) -

@Cerevisiae said:

I'm kind of new around here. Why do people hate Patrick? He seems like a decent fellow to me.

Thum, because he can be extremely obnoxious during the QuickLooks, and err, some other stuff I guess?.

#70 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4308 posts) -
@Cerevisiae said:

I'm kind of new around here. Why do people hate Patrick? He seems like a decent fellow to me.

I honestly have no clue.  I think people just dislike him because hes not an original member of Giant Bomb.  I like him.  
#71 Posted by gla55jAw (2686 posts) -

Good podcast, thanks for sharing. Patrick is an interesting guy. I don't really understand the hate for him. People are just being jerks. The few times I've PMed him, he has always answered me back. I appreciate that and his point of view.

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.