Copy/pasting this straight from Jim's own page. Which, by the way, he has a slightly clearer version right here:
I just finished it. And just…just wow. I don’t even know where to start. No, actually I do:
Throughout the entire debate or interview (conversation?), this Robert guy was rude, obnoxious, belligerent, and constantly interrupting or cutting off Jim in mid-sentence. He kept going on about things like, “So what you’re saying is…” or “What you’ve said in the past is…” when that wasn’t even remotely what Jim EVER said at any point. The fact that he pulled out a throwaway joke as evidence that Jim is sending his “army” into Digital Homicide’s forums was laughable, as proved by Jim himself when he laughed right in the guy’s face.
What blew me away the most was the absolutely ludicrous conclusions the guy was jumping to. I can’t even name all of them because they were so numerous. It’s any wonder Jim was so dumbfounded by the whole proceeding. The fact he was able to keep his composure throughout the whole thing is commendable. I haven’t even seen all of Jim’s work, but I knew all of what this guy was claiming was complete and utter bullshit.
What’s funniest to me is the constant remarks about criticism. Whenever the topic of criticism was raised, this Robert guy would mention the Deadly Profits forum and people pointing out bugs. That if Jim wanted to criticize him, then he’d be happy to hear about the bugs in the game. I’m going to say this very slowly in case “Robert” is listening:
THAT’S.
NOT.
CRITICISM.
Criticism is not bug-hunting like a quality assurance playtester. Criticism is looking at the work as a whole and finding issues with the game’s presentation, its gameplay, story elements, etc. I say again: criticism is not bug-hunting. That this guy believes with all heart that’s what criticism is? That’s unbelievably sad.
I just finished it. And just…just wow. I don’t even know where to start. No, actually I do:
Throughout the entire debate or interview (conversation?), this Robert guy was rude, obnoxious, belligerent, and constantly interrupting or cutting off Jim in mid-sentence. He kept going on about things like, “So what you’re saying is…” or “What you’ve said in the past is…” when that wasn’t even remotely what Jim EVER said at any point. The fact that he pulled out a throwaway joke as evidence that Jim is sending his “army” into Digital Homicide’s forums was laughable, as proved by Jim himself when he laughed right in the guy’s face.
What blew me away the most was the absolutely ludicrous conclusions the guy was jumping to. I can’t even name all of them because they were so numerous. It’s any wonder Jim was so dumbfounded by the whole proceeding. The fact he was able to keep his composure throughout the whole thing is commendable. I haven’t even seen all of Jim’s work, but I knew all of what this guy was claiming was complete and utter bullshit.
What’s funniest to me is the constant remarks about criticism. Whenever the topic of criticism was raised, this Robert guy would mention the Deadly Profits forum and people pointing out bugs. That if Jim wanted to criticize him, then he’d be happy to hear about the bugs in the game. I’m going to say this very slowly in case “Robert” is listening:
THAT’S.
NOT.
CRITICISM.
Criticism is not bug-hunting like a quality assurance playtester. Criticism is looking at the work as a whole and finding issues with the game’s presentation, its gameplay, story elements, etc. I say again: criticism is not bug-hunting. That this guy believes with all heart that’s what criticism is? That’s unbelievably sad.
