Lazy Gamers Jungle Adventures Review Is Up

"Sk8rblaze;c-16359957" wrote:

In the game changer videos that I was watching about the day of the release or so, it felt almost as if they were trying to sell me the pack, rather than try to review it as objectively as they could.

I don’t think he’s being negative for the sake of being negative, or to earn more views. He doesn’t have to. I have been watching his videos since he made a video of a list of reasons why TS3 is better than TS2, and I’ve noticed he’s been a long time fan of the franchise and Maxis for quite some time. He’s been critical with some packs of TS3, and positive about others. Most of the time, my opinion tends to resonate with his, which is why now, before I purchase, I watch his reviews.

He kicked off during TS4 because eventually people got sick of the high pitched ooh’s and ahh’s at nothing that many youtubers frequently record themselves doing to ensure they stay close with EA.

Isn't that usually what happens when someone enjoys the content? If I bought something and enjoyed it, of course I would recommend it to someone else. I would expect that of Game Changers because these are people whose channels are built off of an enjoyment of Sims 4. Personally, I don't consider their reviews "proper" reviews, because they usually aren't structured as a critical evaluation, but rather an overview for an audience who have positive experiences with Sims 4. I don't necessarily think these are people who are faking their enjoyment of Sims 4 for the sake of having a relationship with EA. Maybe it just so happens to be that these are people who enjoy the game and are privileged enough to capitalise off of this enjoyment. Sure EA takes advantage of this, but I'm sure all of us here are capable of making up our own minds rather than relying on the opinions and experiences of Game Changers.

Regarding LGR in general, I don't think his reviews are somehow more "objective", as in "free of bias" (everyone possesses bias) and therefore, more truthful. I think of his reviews as being in more of the classical review format. They're concise and get straight to the point with both positive and negatives (I think the word here is "balanced", as opposed to "objective"), and a concluding opinion. As far as I'm aware, he's the only big YouTuber who reviews The Sims in this format. I also think LGRs channel is structured differently, in that it isn't Sims focussed, and he reviews many other things besides The Sims. In my eyes, all of this places him in a different category from Game Changers.

I also think he resonates more with those who are more critical of Sims 4 because he has openly expressed his disdain toward the game, and I think this does reflect in his reviews. I don't think this makes his reviews less valid or "biased". I mean, if a review has some consensus in opinion with its audience, then it must be a good review, right?

"simgirl1010;c-16359063" wrote:

@JoAnne65
His audience concerning Sims videos are mainly simmers

I'm not sure this is accurate. His subscribers receive an email each time he uploads a new video. He has almost 900,000 subscribers. I'm one of them. I have no interest in some of the games he reviews but I love his delivery so I watch.

That's possible of course. I remember ending up watching him build a tiny LEGO computer for an hour once, couldn't stop watching lol. All his other videos I skip but I can imagine when your interest in gaming is broader than mine (stricly Sims) that may be different.

"TheGoodOldGamer;c-16359598" wrote:

"JoAnne65;c-16358764" wrote:

"TheGoodOldGamer;c-16358202" wrote:

"Sk8rblaze;c-16358184" wrote:

"Pegasys;c-16357912" wrote:

"JoAnne65;c-16357593" wrote:

"Felicity;c-16357309" wrote:
LGR got a few packs free; however, it didn't change his tone, and so it didn't last very long. I think the word people are looking for is not objective (his reviews, like everyone else's, are subjective) but he doesn't have the bias that a reviewer who wants to keep getting their rewards has. In fact, LGR being dropped from the free-game program so quickly shows that his brand of honesty is not appreciated.

It's weird because he reviews are never "all negative." He has issues with the game play of Sims 4, but he does try to point out what he likes, what he doesn't like, the stuff from CAS, and he will say what he thinks is good within the limitations of the game engine.

Edit: Huge typo.

Is, in fact: objective. Objective in the meaning (looked that up) “undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena”. That is exactly what he does. Which is why I value his reviews even in those cases he has a different opinion than me, because he always explains why he feels a certain way*. Enabling me to judge whether I share his opinion or not. He is not biased. And indeed, his reviews aren’t overall negative, also not in this case. Still people feel very threatened by him somehow. Maybe because he presents facts before giving his personal view?

(*example, I remember him being very enthousiastic about GT, but it became clear to me that it was for reasons I don’t care for myself so I didn’t buy the pack until much later when it was on sale)

But by definition, nobody can be "objective" for a review. Because they use their own personal bias to make the review. Maybe they aren't influenced by others, which is what I think you mean, but it's not "objective."

Objective would be: "There are 125 new objects in the pack, and 22 new CAS items."

Subjective: (which any real review is): "There are 125 new objects in the pack, and 22 new CAS items. Since the gameplay offered by these objects isn't that fleshed out, I don't think the pack is worth the money".

There is no true objectivity in any of LGR's reviews - because there is no objectivity in ANY review, unless all one did was state the facts, which defeats the purpose of a review.

I think the both of you are correct, however, I believe @JoAnne65 and the others are essentially saying LGR tends to be the least biased in his reviews; more objective in the sense he usually presents things as they are, without the EA fanboy sugarcoat.

When you have a partnership with EA, and they’re flying you around the world to see their games, catering you, etc. there is more likely to be a bias towards EA there. Not always, but I’ve seen it myself in a variety of reviews.

I see it in Game Changer reviews. In the ones I’ve seen about Jungle Adventure, they were disappointed, but didn’t harp too much on their disappointments. They’ll explore the temple, say something like, “wow I wasn’t expecting it to be so.. barren” or “umm.. I’m already kind of bored with this” and then they’ll move on and try to counter it with good things about the pack. A review is not supposed to be a video of someone trying to make the pack look good by countering a con with a pro.

Just say what’s bad and what’s good, go into detail of those things, and leave it there. Some of these “game changers” (which is a ridiculous name, because every fan is and should be a game changer) try their best to appear unbiased, but don’t do a great job at it. I don’t think it’s always intentional. When someone gives you something for free, you tend to feel in debt to them, and this could very well be a side effect of that.

How are the bold not the same thing? "Well it didn't take very long to complete this tomb. The layout is nice though." Is this not both 'countering a con with a pro' and saying 'what's bad and what's good'? lol

Also, just a quick sidenote, just because LGR isn't influenced by EA, doesn't mean he isn't influenced. He has an audience. He has his analytics. He has a patreon. And he knows how to cater to that. Just because it's not EA's wallet doesn't mean it isn't somebody's.

Because people like that he's negative about the game, he works that angle. If the large majority of his audience didn't like that, you can bet he wouldn't stick to his guns and keep making videos that get fewer views n all that. He'd adjust his reviews in a more positive light, where he'd still share the negative stuff, but it'd be on the backside of it.

That said, I don't mind his reviews. This last one, like I said earlier, had a weird vibe to it, but don't be blinded into thinking he (or anyone else that makes money off of videos or blogs or whatever) is truly altruistic or something.

His audience concerning Sims videos are mainly simmers so I have no idea what you mean. He’s been highly positive about the franchise in the past, he has been very critical about Sims 3 (and in many cases rightly so). What strikes me by the way is how simmers keep insisting he’s negative, while he isn’t completely negative at all. Seems to me many simmers are the ones being very biased where his reviews are concerned (I even see people commenting in LGR topics saying they are not going to watch it, then have an opinion about it).

I’m curious, in what way did you disagree with his review? Can you give arguments as to why what he says is not true/too biased/too negative? Because all I see is people saying he does, but not actually why exactly. At what points exactly does he give false or biased information about the pack?

I didn't have an issue with his review, other than I thought he had a weird vibe to it (i.e. it seemed pretty obvious to me there were parts he liked about it, but at the same time he really really hated having to say it, lol). All I meant to say was, as with any YouTuber, I keep in mind where his biases are, because yes, he has them, just as anyone does. I don't blindly follow him any more than I would with anyone else. I weigh what he says, how he says it, who is watching, etc.

(Personally, his Sims 4 videos are the least appealing to me. I love LGR for his other stuff, mainly his videos about old tech and his thrifting. I didn't know thrifting was a big thing for collectors until I saw his series on it, lol.)

For the simplicity of discussion, let's say he has 100 patreons. Lets say 98 of those patreons really don't care for his reviews about the Sims 4 games. Maybe they don't watch the videos. Maybe they're vocal to him about it. In some way or fashion, he figures out that it's hurting his bottom line, as a business man, a brand, etc. There's no doubt in my mind he would either change how those reviews go, or he would stop making them altogether.

On the flip side of that, I do believe that due in large part to how he's been recieved (especially since that 2 Years of Meh video or whatever it was called), he has kept his reviews with a certain narrative that appeals to that audience boost or whatever. He is more than well aware enough of how he, as a brand, 'stands out' if you will from other Sims reviewers, and works that angle. It's good publicity. Brand recognition and all that.

It's all well and good to think he's being 'more honest than anybody else' just because you happen to like his style, or agree with most of his views, or just because he's different from everyone else and you wanna be that contrarian that goes against the grain, that's all fine and good. But it's not because he's being 'more honest' than anyone else. He runs a brand and a business and he's doing what he can to stand out with it.

I'm not saying he's falsely being more negative than he might naturally be, or falsely less positive than he might naturally be. All I'm saying is that he's focusing where the draw for the audience is. The audience right now likes his current narrative. But if they didn't? That would change or he wouldn't keep making those videos. To be quite honest, I believe if it were up to him, he wouldn't even bother continuing to make Sims 4 videos. A lot of times it comes across like it's a chore for him. But there's a significant enough draw to them from his audience that he can't just drop them. It would be a bad business move.

Thanks :)
As for his tone, my husband was listening in the background while I was watching the JA review and said at one point, completely out of the blue: "Who's that boring guy?", purely based on his tone of voice. He does that, but I don't think that started with Sims 4 is meh? It started when he became disappointed with the franchise. I remember him making a video where he explained that, while people were accusing him of hating the Sims series, he actually loved it (if you watch his videos you've probably watched that one too and know which video I mean). That was August 2015 and the accusations of him hating the series clearly didn't just stem from the new game, but also its predecessor, Sims 3. He says in that video The Sims 'by far' give him most of his views and therefore most of his income. (that's three years ago, maybe that has changed)

You say this review had a weird vibe. I'm not sure if weird is the right word, I think he's struggling with the same thing someone like me is struggling with with this pack: it's very well made, it's beautiful, it's open, it has some amazing animations and interactions, it in fact was the first pack for Sims 4 that got me absorbed for hours in a row (well, I really enjoyed the science career as well for a while). But right when I thought I had finally found my way into Sims 4, I sort of hit a wall (when doing the temple). Because that was it, I'd done it all. Not that I've done all (there being several layouts and traps changing and there's still one gate closed for me), but I sensed that it won't add anything new. Just the same things in a different setting. It's like flying for a couple of hours and then landing on the ground again. I think - can't speak for him but it's what I'm sensing - that's what's causing that weird vibe. Loved this, but that was it. If I may speak for myself: I was genuinely sad when I realized it.

This doesn't mean you have to agree with that, but the people who do agree with it sort of meet each other in this topic. Like I can imagine people in other topics may discuss other YouTubers? I don't think LGR is biased. I just think he really doesn't like this version that much.

I watched him build that little computer too. The whole thing.

I think LGR has become very biased against the Sims. DOn't get me wrong, The Sims is far from perfect, and I'm glad he's not a reviewer who gushes through most of the video with a constant "OH MY GOD THIS IS AWESOME". And Stuff Packs don't exactly rock my world.

But he seems to start every review with the attitude that he wouldn't get it if he didn't have to review it, which is not a good start because clearly he's not going to enjoy the game no matter what. He states that for most things. He's been doing horrible things to Ralph but this time he couldn't even say "At least it's not a Stuff Pack".

When he headed for those rabbitholes he didn't seem at all inclined to experiment or take risks with his characters so that we'd see what happened if they failed. He ignored several potential encounters, like not going deeper into the jungle or helping out and acting surprised when the encounter ended there. He's welcome to play that way on his free time - many people will - but this is a REVIEW. He doesn't take the pet, and I would have liked to see how JA works with a huge game-changer like Cats&Dogs.

Jungle Adventure is a Vacation pack. 90% of its value depends on whether you like playing in Salvadorado. You can't live in it all the time and you're not really meant to. The important question becomes then, "Did you enjoy your time in Salvadorado and will you go back there?" While I do want to know about the things that aren't so great, I don't want to hear his personal opinion on how a part of the game is bad because he didn't enjoy doing it - I just frikkin' LOVE collectibles. He just seems so determined to dislike the game.

I don't think Jungle Adventure should be compared to World Adventure - except in terms of any Jungle explorations in World Adventure and whether it's deeper than that jungle - because for sure we'll get more destinations. It's clearly not the whole world; it says so right there in the pack title.

"Loanet;c-16360167" wrote:
I think LGR has become very biased against the Sims. DOn't get me wrong, The Sims is far from perfect, and I'm glad he's not a reviewer who gushes through most of the video with a constant "OH MY GOD THIS IS AWESOME". And Stuff Packs don't exactly rock my world.

But he seems to start every review with the attitude that he wouldn't get it if he didn't have to review it, which is not a good start because clearly he's not going to enjoy the game no matter what. He states that for most things. He's been doing horrible things to Ralph but this time he couldn't even say "At least it's not a Stuff Pack".

When he headed for those rabbitholes he didn't seem at all inclined to experiment or take risks with his characters so that we'd see what happened if they failed. He ignored several potential encounters, like not going deeper into the jungle or helping out and acting surprised when the encounter ended there. He's welcome to play that way on his free time - many people will - but this is a REVIEW. He doesn't take the pet, and I would have liked to see how JA works with a huge game-changer like Cats&Dogs.

Jungle Adventure is a Vacation pack. 90% of its value depends on whether you like playing in Salvadorado. You can't live in it all the time and you're not really meant to. The important question becomes then, "Did you enjoy your time in Salvadorado and will you go back there?" While I do want to know about the things that aren't so great, I don't want to hear his personal opinion on how a part of the game is bad because he didn't enjoy doing it - I just frikkin' LOVE collectibles. He just seems so determined to dislike the game.

I don't think Jungle Adventure should be compared to World Adventure - except in terms of any Jungle explorations in World Adventure and whether it's deeper than that jungle - because for sure we'll get more destinations. It's clearly not the whole world; it says so right there in the pack title.

Reviews are always the reviewers personal opinion. I find it amusing because he doesn't present his opinion in a more positive way, people give a negative or bias opinion about him.

He enjoyed the pack for what it was. He gave enough show and tell, he is not doing a guide video or a Let's play video. He is giving a review that was to the point. And since JA was a severe cut of World Adventure and Sims has previous series.. why not compare? They stuck 4 on this game, so anything in the previous series can rightly be compared. It is done for every single game in a series. Sims 4 is not special to be left alone when comparing.

He has issues with this series and as a simmer he has a right to express this. He wasn't given the game by EA. He owes EA nothing. He has given pretty good reviews on some of the packs. People are just amazing with their thinking of him and his reviews (again reviews are opinions).

I was actually surprised. I saw a couple game changers that gave a similar response as the lazy gamer. They liked the build/buy and CAS though. The jungle is not their thing.

"Sk8rblaze;c-16360682" wrote:

"cameronw209;c-16360058" wrote:

"Sk8rblaze;c-16359957" wrote:

In the game changer videos that I was watching about the day of the release or so, it felt almost as if they were trying to sell me the pack, rather than try to review it as objectively as they could.

I don’t think he’s being negative for the sake of being negative, or to earn more views. He doesn’t have to. I have been watching his videos since he made a video of a list of reasons why TS3 is better than TS2, and I’ve noticed he’s been a long time fan of the franchise and Maxis for quite some time. He’s been critical with some packs of TS3, and positive about others. Most of the time, my opinion tends to resonate with his, which is why now, before I purchase, I watch his reviews.

He kicked off during TS4 because eventually people got sick of the high pitched ooh’s and ahh’s at nothing that many youtubers frequently record themselves doing to ensure they stay close with EA.

Isn't that usually what happens when someone enjoys the content? If I bought something and enjoyed it, of course I would recommend it to someone else. I would expect that of Game Changers because these are people whose channels are built off of an enjoyment of Sims 4. Personally, I don't consider their reviews "proper" reviews, because they usually aren't structured as a critical evaluation, but rather an overview for an audience who have positive experiences with Sims 4. I don't necessarily think these are people who are faking their enjoyment of Sims 4 for the sake of having a relationship with EA. Maybe it just so happens to be that these are people who enjoy the game and are privileged enough to capitalise off of this enjoyment. Sure EA takes advantage of this, but I'm sure all of us here are capable of making up our own minds rather than relying on the opinions and experiences of Game Changers.

Regarding LGR in general, I don't think his reviews are somehow more "objective", as in "free of bias" (everyone possesses bias) and therefore, more truthful. I think of his reviews as being in more of the classical review format. They're concise and get straight to the point with both positive and negatives (I think the word here is "balanced", as opposed to "objective"), and a concluding opinion. As far as I'm aware, he's the only big YouTuber who reviews The Sims in this format. I also think LGRs channel is structured differently, in that it isn't Sims focussed, and he reviews many other things besides The Sims. In my eyes, all of this places him in a different category from Game Changers.

I also think he resonates more with those who are more critical of Sims 4 because he has openly expressed his disdain toward the game, and I think this does reflect in his reviews. I don't think this makes his reviews less valid or "biased". I mean, if a review has some consensus in opinion with its audience, then it must be a good review, right?

Depends on who you watch, I suppose.

I felt it since they were calling them "Yib Sims" or whatever, the various Sims "partner" groups are nothing more than a mere attempt at EA trying to build up hype over the game on various websites, primarily YouTube.

I'm not singling particular one out, but it's quite often these people are flown out to EA, or provided with early copies of the game, and give a glowing review to everyone. Then you watch some of their videos later, and you see they are frustrated with the same things we are, yet do not make it a point to bring it up to EA with their "higher" status.

Here's an example.

The reason why I prefer the bluntness of other reviewers, such as LGR. I don't feel like I'm being sold the game, even if the person is a huge fan of the franchise. Tell me how it is, and let me make the decision myself.

I agree. But this is the problem when you are being paid for a good review. They are trying to sell you the game. It’s their job in that video.

I actually only watch most of the You tubes AFTER I bought a pack - not before I buy most of them - and mostly for entertainment as well as seeing all the content we get (in case I missed something), as well as to see what, if anything, that simmer does with the content in their videos. I am not influenced, dissuaded, or persuaded by anyone. So I guess nothing any other player can say on you tube or any where else - even here convinces me of anything. By the time I see most of these videos - between the trailer and the live play by the Guru's I totally make up my mind about a pack - period. If i watch a you tuber - I do it solely for the entertainment or just because I like that individual or perhaps find their videos humorous and if they make me laugh, then I feel find about supporting them as a follower.

I am not influenced by any simmer (or their number of followers) - so their title means nothing to me - but I am influenced to pay attention to friendly, likeable people.

I've reviewed this thread and found that throughout the discussion there has been repeat focus on Youtubers rather than this Youtubers review. I've outlined this before but it bears repeating; It is not ok to make another person the the topic of discussion whether they be another forum member, staff or youtuber. By focusing on the person rather than the content or review, it makes the conversation and points personal which is not ok. This is no longer an appropriate discussion hence the closure of this thread.