Lazy Gamers Jungle Adventures Review Is Up

"MidnightAura;c-16356994" wrote:

"SimTrippy;c-16356966" wrote:

"NorthDakotaGamer;c-16355998" wrote:
So me sensing the EA game changers reviews as sounding very fake is offensive? It is just they way seem to come off as. I don't agree with every review from any specific Youtuber, but I can honestly tell when they do not appear to be honest. Honest reviews have both negative and positive in them. This particular one stated the gameplay was good, if you already like the limitations of Sims 4. So for those that dislike the limitations, it sounds like it will not improve the game.

No, I did not say it's offensive :) I said it's annoying for people to assume that a) "EA game changers" (which people seem to despise for the name alone) are fake because they like the game and get excited about B&B additions (so do others, just FYI), or god forbid make money this way, or that b) LGR is fake (since some other people seem to think he just caters to the "negative vibe", which is an equally weird assumption) just because he's got certain issues with the game he's trying to address. I don't see why people nowadays have to call everything that doesn't support their feelings "fake" or manipulative. Especially when it's about what games we like.

And again, cause this kinda keeps popping up: yes, most EA game changers make money on YouTube (not even necessarily from EA, but in the many complex ways content creators on YouTube get paid). But many of them probably made vids before actually earning enough to make a living from it, and EA liked what they were doing for the sims and invited them into their program, just like they invited LGR. And if you've ever worked in marketing you know you're not gonna send free products to people for no reason at all, but for the sole purpose of reaching their audiences. They pick them because they're popular, it's rarely the other way around. People have to stop saying that LGR declining to be a part of EA's chosen early reviewers, makes him any more or less honest than anyone else.

Someone who likes the game might just have less qualms about signing up for this than someone who doesn't & wants that to remain clear. But really, I doubt EA would've forced him to change his reviews. Why would they ask him at all if they were too afraid of what he had to say? He's got audiences they want to connect with, that's why he got invited. He declined, life goes on. Other people didn't. And that doesn't make them any less trustworthy. If I love something and a company asks me if I want to get it for free early so I can write about it, I'd say yes in a heartbeat, too. And that wouldn't suddenly make me 1000% more critical about the product, just you know, because. Maybe you can tell when someone's being dishonest, but I'm afraid when it comes to this particular topic, people often equate dishonesty with disagreement.

@MidnightAura I wasn't trying to derail the thread, sorry you feel that way.

As much as I hate to say this I feel it needs to be said: LGR refused to be a part of the programme because he didn't want to compromise the integrity of his channel. He is by default more objective than a game changer because he is not getting their products for free, he is not getting free gifts off EA, he is not getting flown to events run by EA not does LGR have a channel that solely depends on the sims and only the sims.

So many game changers are not very balanced that's all I will say and I know what @NorthDakotaGamer is referring too. I'm not saying anything further on that topic.

LGR is purely objective as he's not gaining anything from EA in the process nor does he hope too. I will always trust a review from someone not getting showered with free things from the company in question with anything over someone who is and that goes for anything. I watched a youtuber recently do a review of a new shooter game that is getting panned heavily for loot boxes and believe it or not charging people for a save slot. This youtuber said the game was not that bad and criticised the "fanboys" of the game who were rightfully upset at this latest game.

Then lo and behold it turns out the company had sent the youtuber a big box of free swag. Hoodies, and other items. I refuse to believe that box did not sway their opinion and defence of the game especially when the youtuber previously was critical of loot boxes. Suddenly they weren't.

Same principle applies to the sims.

Anyhow back on topic.

I personally don't trust LGR's reviews, because he's gotten a reputation for being negative on sims games. His viewers expect him to be negative, which they see as 'honest', so as a result, he's more inclined to look for the negative, because that's what his subscribers, ake the people mostly paying for his games, want to hear. If he were too positive about something, he'd fear losing subscribers.