A youtube webcomic reviewer named "Webcomic Relief" recently released his review for Housepets!. I'm not linking to it because of vulgar language, but you can search it up easily.
Now then, this thread isn't for us to be here making fun of this guy for rating Housepets! badly, no nothing like that. But rather discuss the points he gives and how we feel about it. For example, something that stood out to me, he says that a bad thing about the plot is that it retconned Peanut's crush on Grape to have been around before he found out she was a girl. Like what? Anyone have any idea where in the comic an idea like that was given?
Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I haven't seen his Housepets review yet, though I have seen his other reviews and I like those.
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Yeah, Rick has only ever retconned two things to my knoweldge: the catnip arc and many of its implications (completely out of existence) and the color of Res's leaf because people are silly. 
(also the color of the curtains in Words Are sWords (also because people are silly)). 
(also the color of the curtains in Words Are sWords (also because people are silly)). 
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I'm aware of the review and the opinion on Housepets, but haven't actually seen it. Maybe the reviewer is perceiving how Peanut acted towards Grape at the shelter in the Housepets Babies arc as a crush? Which I highly doubt is the case, as little kids are often that excitable.
There's no way for anything to appeal to everyone. Things that try that often fail miserably. Everything has an audience, as seen with the forums here and how many of the commenters for that video agree with the review.
There's no way for anything to appeal to everyone. Things that try that often fail miserably. Everything has an audience, as seen with the forums here and how many of the commenters for that video agree with the review.
Faith doesn't change circumstances. Faith changes me.
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
-
AnimeNerd88
- Posts: 415
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2016 11:22 pm
- Location: Hope's Peak Academy (SEND HELP!)
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
One thing I just want to say.
He thought that there was nothing interesting.
Oh, yes! Because there is nothing interesting about a human going through the struggle of wondering weather he should go back to being human or stay as a corgi! That isn't interesting in the slightest!
He thought that there was nothing interesting.
Oh, yes! Because there is nothing interesting about a human going through the struggle of wondering weather he should go back to being human or stay as a corgi! That isn't interesting in the slightest!
Let's give it everything we've got! Get ready, because it's Punishment Time!
-Monokuma
What? Even if I like dark topics, I can't resist cuteness.
-Monokuma
What? Even if I like dark topics, I can't resist cuteness.
-
RockstarRaccoon
- Worst Mod EVER!
- Posts: 4645
- Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:50 pm
- Location: South Florida
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
*looks up the review*
Eww... Youtube...
...And it's 45 minutes. You sir do not understand media formats...
......aaand he doesn't understand how the Ursa Majors work, because they were NOT for single strips, but the whole year... Also "you're popular so your awards don't matter" is a weak argument about anything, considering Housepets has beaten some other, VERY popular comics.....
.........He... just keeps talking... I mean, he's just talking... What is his point? Make your point?
His point is that he personally didn't like it. I skimmed through the first 10 minutes of the video for him to finally make his point. It was pointless and kind of stupid. I don't mean that as an insult, I mean, he made me watch 10 minutes of rambling to make the point that it wasn't his thing. Not only could he have told me this in FAR less time, or better, in a forum post, but it's not actually critical: there's no objective exploration of this. Nostalgia Critic will say his opinion at some point, but that's not what the video is about. A "Critical Review" is about actually exploring how well something was done from a relatively objective standpoint, taking various potential angles into account, not about what one person's first glance is. Nostalgia Critic actually did a video on the usefulness of Critics and why they'll say things that seem off on a top-level, but make more sense if you look at it from their perspective. All he's really doing here is going on for 45 minutes about how he wasn't enthused by a comic, because it doesn't have elements that he personally likes. A good critical review would give information about the comic from angles I've never noticed before, and at least mention the fact that low-fantasy world-building and slice-of-life light-comedy are major aspects of why people like this... But he didn't mention those things. He didn't care to even look up what he was saying, because a lot of it is either wrong or entirely his personal feelings with no account of what others felt. And the entire time he has this demeaning tone like he thinks he's somehow making a brilliant point to the masses, and it just kind of comes off as insulting, and it's really not deserved... He even acts like people will hate him at the end for stating what he seems to believe is a brilliant truth...
But this is neither critical, nor really much of a review. This is a rant about why he thinks a comic is bad because he personally isn't interested in the elements it focuses on.
...He DID make a good point about the site logo though. Rick why? Go update the website...
Anyway, he only has about 2,500 views on this, probably gained from the controversy he's generated. He's just not a good critic / reviewer in general, and 45 minutes is alot of time to ask someone to spend watching a video that has little takeaway, so I wouldn't bother telling anyone else to look it up.
Eww... Youtube...
...And it's 45 minutes. You sir do not understand media formats...
......aaand he doesn't understand how the Ursa Majors work, because they were NOT for single strips, but the whole year... Also "you're popular so your awards don't matter" is a weak argument about anything, considering Housepets has beaten some other, VERY popular comics.....
.........He... just keeps talking... I mean, he's just talking... What is his point? Make your point?
His point is that he personally didn't like it. I skimmed through the first 10 minutes of the video for him to finally make his point. It was pointless and kind of stupid. I don't mean that as an insult, I mean, he made me watch 10 minutes of rambling to make the point that it wasn't his thing. Not only could he have told me this in FAR less time, or better, in a forum post, but it's not actually critical: there's no objective exploration of this. Nostalgia Critic will say his opinion at some point, but that's not what the video is about. A "Critical Review" is about actually exploring how well something was done from a relatively objective standpoint, taking various potential angles into account, not about what one person's first glance is. Nostalgia Critic actually did a video on the usefulness of Critics and why they'll say things that seem off on a top-level, but make more sense if you look at it from their perspective. All he's really doing here is going on for 45 minutes about how he wasn't enthused by a comic, because it doesn't have elements that he personally likes. A good critical review would give information about the comic from angles I've never noticed before, and at least mention the fact that low-fantasy world-building and slice-of-life light-comedy are major aspects of why people like this... But he didn't mention those things. He didn't care to even look up what he was saying, because a lot of it is either wrong or entirely his personal feelings with no account of what others felt. And the entire time he has this demeaning tone like he thinks he's somehow making a brilliant point to the masses, and it just kind of comes off as insulting, and it's really not deserved... He even acts like people will hate him at the end for stating what he seems to believe is a brilliant truth...
But this is neither critical, nor really much of a review. This is a rant about why he thinks a comic is bad because he personally isn't interested in the elements it focuses on.
...He DID make a good point about the site logo though. Rick why? Go update the website...
Anyway, he only has about 2,500 views on this, probably gained from the controversy he's generated. He's just not a good critic / reviewer in general, and 45 minutes is alot of time to ask someone to spend watching a video that has little takeaway, so I wouldn't bother telling anyone else to look it up.
Hey guys, I'm one of the RP section mods. Feel free to bug me any time: I'm not strict and I try to be very approachable.
Fanfiction Character: Vallerie Nightengale (female, idiot)
Fanfiction Character: Vallerie Nightengale (female, idiot)
-
rickgriffin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1907
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:36 pm
- Location: Greetings from beautiful Place!
- Contact:
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I have attempted but don't know how. The whole site needs to be updated to Wordpress 4 which requires a complete redesign from the ground up which I haven't been able to carve out an indeterminate period of time for, especially since I'd need to learn how to migrate without causing errors all over the place. Alternatively, I could pay someone with the money I don't have.RockstarRaccoon wrote: ...He DID make a good point about the site logo though. Rick why? Go update the website...
That's a legit criticism though. I'll take it.
I'm sure the cold hand of science will be able to overcome his magical powers
-
FancyHat
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 5:15 pm
- Location: Somewhere in the Southern US...Would prefer Scotland.
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
He did make some tiny valid points, but he really needed to focus more on the other people's views, and not all on his own..I mean most of his reviews end up being mostly his personal opinion except for about three, The "Las Lindas" review, "Lackadaisy" review, and I forgot the third.. The Las Lindas review WOULDN'T have been up here if not almost all views are the same on it...Mostly hated by anyone who reads webcomic for fun or plot and not for well...Go find out yourselves cause I sure as heck ain't getting strikes over it..I prefer you watch the review instead, save the brain bleach for when you'll really need it.
"Crimes?" "Crimes."
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
One of the comments on the video pointed out that the cast page was terribly outdated and leaves a bad impression.
I think that the cast page needs to be updated or simply be removed.
I think that the cast page needs to be updated or simply be removed.
Have you been looking at the thing above this? Dis is my old signature and is not relevant anymore.Blog:
https://genstarblog.blogspot.com/
Da bad translations by Render:
http://www.housepetscomic.com/forums/vi ... 99#p772199
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
...okay, I have GOT to know how a cast page can leave a bad impression. Only scenario I can think of is if the site and comic is used as a portfolio piece.
You know what, that actually is important if that's the case.
You know what, that actually is important if that's the case.Faith doesn't change circumstances. Faith changes me.
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I'm not so sure how to comment on his review, honestly. The way i figure it, he wasn't really enthusiastic about the review and i sort of felt like he was doing this just for a valid reason to complain. Nobody's perfect, not all comics and movies are great, but he could just go into more details than just using creative language to make his point.
As far as the site goes and it's updates, it maybe outdated (TWC hasn't been updated in ages, honestly), but i really can't see this as a valid reason for complaining. What do you expect to see on a site when you want to read a comic?
The comic
Forums
Details about the comic. the cast and it's setting. everything else you have to read about and see if you like it.
There could be more, and i've never been sure as to what kind of beef he has with the comic, but he's certainly not going into different perspectives well enough. For one, he misses out on all the good depth in the comic. While he can have some valid points on claiming the comic feels at times it's not going anywhere and not challenging itself, he's not pointing out the good depth in the writing and the art that the comic goes to that can get both fans and non-fans wrapped up into the comic. What parts does he feel that are not challenging?
As far as the site goes and it's updates, it maybe outdated (TWC hasn't been updated in ages, honestly), but i really can't see this as a valid reason for complaining. What do you expect to see on a site when you want to read a comic?
The comic
Forums
Details about the comic. the cast and it's setting. everything else you have to read about and see if you like it.
There could be more, and i've never been sure as to what kind of beef he has with the comic, but he's certainly not going into different perspectives well enough. For one, he misses out on all the good depth in the comic. While he can have some valid points on claiming the comic feels at times it's not going anywhere and not challenging itself, he's not pointing out the good depth in the writing and the art that the comic goes to that can get both fans and non-fans wrapped up into the comic. What parts does he feel that are not challenging?
3 words - Liquid Metal Fur
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Alright, finally saw it. Now, I can accept that people will have differing opinions, and there's usually nothing wrong with that. For example, I respect ProJared's opinion, though I ended up greatly enjoying Metal Gear Rising. I respect Doug Walker's opinion, though I enjoy Space Jam. I respect AniMatt's opinions, though I enjoy Alpha and Omega from time to time. It could also be that I have poor taste in things, too.
This guy just seemed too mean-spirited. For most of it, I couldn't help but think that he was missing a lot of what happened to these "flat characters" over the years. I can accept that that could happen when you binge-read eight years worth of comics, though, but he seemed to hold it as absolute fact. I can accept that this wasn't something that he would be appealed by, as that's a reality of pretty much everything, and at least he admits this part.
A few other things I can accept, as they are opinions, and an opinion is supposed to give me more insight from an outside source. It's why I like reading through the "Do you consider yourself a furry" thread, as it lets me see differing views. That's reviews in general.
Now, there's a difference from someone who read through it for the sake of a review, and someone who has had the privilege of seeing things happen as they come; the latter has the opportunity to see how a character grows, while the former is likely to let themselves just rush through it. If this is what happened, I don't know, but regardless, he seemed to not bring up a lot of the characterization.
"Nothing happens"? We've had the cosmic game, we've had Grape grow through her issues, we see Max get more confident, we see Fox practice more discretion, you could write a whole book dedicated to King, we see Peanut struggle with an unknown crush (not too well, but it's a start), we see Zach grow more confidence, we see what Sasha goes through, we see Fido finally work up the courage to publicly announce his relationship, and that's just what comes immediately to mind.
And honestly, his critique on the art is what finally got a reaction out of me; saying that Rick was putting too much effort in word bubbles than in the actual art, and saying he was doing it wrong. It was his tone and choice of words that really got to me. The bigger issue was what he said regarding the shading. yeah, we don't see a lot, as it's really used for the more emotional panels. It's what draws our eyes to the subject at hand. Newspaper-style comics often don't get that luxury, usually it's only cross-hatching that provides shading, if the artist so decides to. He seemed to imply that Rick was wasting his time on things!
Oy, I feel like I'm going to regret typing this, but I suddenly feel like one of those "white knights" fans who only adds fuel to the fire...
This guy just seemed too mean-spirited. For most of it, I couldn't help but think that he was missing a lot of what happened to these "flat characters" over the years. I can accept that that could happen when you binge-read eight years worth of comics, though, but he seemed to hold it as absolute fact. I can accept that this wasn't something that he would be appealed by, as that's a reality of pretty much everything, and at least he admits this part.
A few other things I can accept, as they are opinions, and an opinion is supposed to give me more insight from an outside source. It's why I like reading through the "Do you consider yourself a furry" thread, as it lets me see differing views. That's reviews in general.
Now, there's a difference from someone who read through it for the sake of a review, and someone who has had the privilege of seeing things happen as they come; the latter has the opportunity to see how a character grows, while the former is likely to let themselves just rush through it. If this is what happened, I don't know, but regardless, he seemed to not bring up a lot of the characterization.
"Nothing happens"? We've had the cosmic game, we've had Grape grow through her issues, we see Max get more confident, we see Fox practice more discretion, you could write a whole book dedicated to King, we see Peanut struggle with an unknown crush (not too well, but it's a start), we see Zach grow more confidence, we see what Sasha goes through, we see Fido finally work up the courage to publicly announce his relationship, and that's just what comes immediately to mind.
And honestly, his critique on the art is what finally got a reaction out of me; saying that Rick was putting too much effort in word bubbles than in the actual art, and saying he was doing it wrong. It was his tone and choice of words that really got to me. The bigger issue was what he said regarding the shading. yeah, we don't see a lot, as it's really used for the more emotional panels. It's what draws our eyes to the subject at hand. Newspaper-style comics often don't get that luxury, usually it's only cross-hatching that provides shading, if the artist so decides to. He seemed to imply that Rick was wasting his time on things!
Oy, I feel like I'm going to regret typing this, but I suddenly feel like one of those "white knights" fans who only adds fuel to the fire...
Faith doesn't change circumstances. Faith changes me.
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
-
FancyHat
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 5:15 pm
- Location: Somewhere in the Southern US...Would prefer Scotland.
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
No, you aren't really adding fuel to any fire..More like spraying water on the fire. And trust me you could be things a lot worse than a white Knight type...*cough*rabidperfectionistsfantype*cough*. Also Space Jam was one of those movies where it's so bad it's good, heck I couldn't remember the rather rounded fella's name so I called him one of his previous character roles, Nedrey(The tub that becomes a Dilophosaur's dinner in Jurassic Park.). I think most reviewers of Webcomics tend to skip over to the larger webcomic like Lackadaisy or Zoophobia (NOT RELATED TO ZOOTOPIA DANG IT!). Heck I think this danish fellow is the only person who has out right done a video review of Houspets, and in the comments people have done what commenters do best on YouTube and argue and chat about completely unrelated subjects except for a few who do make more valid criticisms than WCR himself!
"Crimes?" "Crimes."
-
RockstarRaccoon
- Worst Mod EVER!
- Posts: 4645
- Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:50 pm
- Location: South Florida
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Once again, I wouldn't recommend anyone take the 45 minutes it takes to watch it: there's really nothing of interest in there. If you read Housepets, you know what Housepets is like, so there's no reason to reward him just for taking a controversial viewpoint but failing to objectively back it...
Hey guys, I'm one of the RP section mods. Feel free to bug me any time: I'm not strict and I try to be very approachable.
Fanfiction Character: Vallerie Nightengale (female, idiot)
Fanfiction Character: Vallerie Nightengale (female, idiot)
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I actually don't mind the font used for the logo, I think it's pretty okay...rickgriffin wrote:I have attempted but don't know how. The whole site needs to be updated to Wordpress 4 which requires a complete redesign from the ground up which I haven't been able to carve out an indeterminate period of time for, especially since I'd need to learn how to migrate without causing errors all over the place. Alternatively, I could pay someone with the money I don't have.RockstarRaccoon wrote: ...He DID make a good point about the site logo though. Rick why? Go update the website...
That's a legit criticism though. I'll take it.
-
Not A Furry
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Don't pretend we wouldn't do it for freerickgriffin wrote:I have attempted but don't know how. The whole site needs to be updated to Wordpress 4 which requires a complete redesign from the ground up which I haven't been able to carve out an indeterminate period of time for, especially since I'd need to learn how to migrate without causing errors all over the place. Alternatively, I could pay someone with the money I don't have.RockstarRaccoon wrote: ...He DID make a good point about the site logo though. Rick why? Go update the website...
That's a legit criticism though. I'll take it.
I think there's more than enough qualified people here to make a thread and get it solved in a few weeks at mostAlso regarding the video, he's definitely not a good reviewer. For several reasons, but mostly because he didn't really make a lot of valid points, it felt more like he was overlooking the good things and nitpicking the bad ones without giving a lot of valid suggestions. It really did feel mean-spirited.
The structure of the video felt unplanned, the way he spoke felt like he was just repeating the same things over and over again for 45 minutes straight, the review didn't seem impartial from the beginning (The way he acted gave me the impression he didn't want to do it on the first place out of laziness)... I wouldn't take it too seriously Rick, I personally like the way this comic is made and why it's made like that. It doesn't really need weird anime angles, it doesn't need incredibly complex arcs with an overly intrincated storyline and "taking risks", it's awesome the way it is, and if you want to experiment or try new things it's entirely up to you.
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
He made many good points, most I agree with. Some points however seemed insignificant
-
Sleet
- Bringing Foxy Back
- Posts: 17291
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 1:32 am
- Location: Nephelokokkygia
- Contact:
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Could somebody explain to me why I should waste 45 minutes of my life watching a 2500-view video on YouTube that very easily could have been an article?
I mean, skimming through some of what people are saying he said, it sounds like he thinks Housepets! should have a different format than it does. Understandable, since the Housepets! format is very, very uncommon in webcomics. It's more a revitalization of the newspaper comic strip format than the plot-based comic book format that's more popular. The humor is in the character interactions and amusing situations. Character-developing long plot arcs aren't that. Personally, I like the comic the least when it gets like that (cosmic game arc, for example). So Housepets! fails at being something it isn't in the first place? Shocker.
I mean, skimming through some of what people are saying he said, it sounds like he thinks Housepets! should have a different format than it does. Understandable, since the Housepets! format is very, very uncommon in webcomics. It's more a revitalization of the newspaper comic strip format than the plot-based comic book format that's more popular. The humor is in the character interactions and amusing situations. Character-developing long plot arcs aren't that. Personally, I like the comic the least when it gets like that (cosmic game arc, for example). So Housepets! fails at being something it isn't in the first place? Shocker.
Questions? Comments? Concerns? Friendly banter? Feel free to click the "PM" button below!
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Oh dear, someone wasted 45 minutes to overcriticize the comic. Bwaa bwaa, handkerchief?
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Am I the only one who thinks it ironic that now Housepets! has now shifted to more common Webcomic format?
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I'm going to be perfectly honest, Star, that crossed my mind when the page loaded up for me, too.
Faith doesn't change circumstances. Faith changes me.
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
Avatar by CHAOKOCartoons
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
So pretty much, the whole argument of "Of course it's different than most webcomics! It's an homage to newspaper comics!" is now thrown out the window.
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Well, I haven't all that time to spend watching this "review" of the comic, neither I can understand every word without subtitles, but the impression is that this "review" is biased and for not serious at all... Then, speaking in general about reviewing videos that want to appear professional, I don't like the use of a colorful language and the inserting of short video parts apparently put only for irony purposes.
-
rickgriffin
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1907
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:36 pm
- Location: Greetings from beautiful Place!
- Contact:
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Not for what's currently still 99.9% of my total run . . .Saturn381 wrote:So pretty much, the whole argument of "Of course it's different than most webcomics! It's an homage to newspaper comics!" is now thrown out the window.
I'm sure the cold hand of science will be able to overcome his magical powers
-
IdleCurator
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2014 7:25 am
- Location: Orbiting the sun, where else?
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
I thought the review was a little harsh but a point that really took me off guard was when he mentioned the lack of shading. Looking back through the comic I was surprised to find that he's right. Although there a few times occasions when Rick included it, such as: https://www.housepetscomic.com/comic/20 ... is-temple/
https://www.housepetscomic.com/comic/20 ... ral-plane/
(well a fair bit of Temple Crashers)
I think the comic looks great but it's at its' best at night where he really plays with the shadows: https://www.housepetscomic.com/comic/20 ... r-playing/
https://www.housepetscomic.com/comic/20 ... ral-plane/
(well a fair bit of Temple Crashers)
I think the comic looks great but it's at its' best at night where he really plays with the shadows: https://www.housepetscomic.com/comic/20 ... r-playing/
Hi Hi Pie
-
HundKatzeMaus
- Posts: 741
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:31 am
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Well normally I like the stuff he does, but...I couldn't bring myself to watch the whole review.
The problem for me was the beginning. It isn't the first time he critized a known webcomic, but at least normally he is able to hook one up to it and makes his points during the review, but this time he spended too much time to say how boring Housepets! is for him. I felt more like he forced himself to review it, which is actually really sad.
But what I really didn't like was that he took another jab at the shading of Housepets! during a review of another webcomic.
The problem for me was the beginning. It isn't the first time he critized a known webcomic, but at least normally he is able to hook one up to it and makes his points during the review, but this time he spended too much time to say how boring Housepets! is for him. I felt more like he forced himself to review it, which is actually really sad.
But what I really didn't like was that he took another jab at the shading of Housepets! during a review of another webcomic.
-
FancyHat
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Fri May 13, 2016 5:15 pm
- Location: Somewhere in the Southern US...Would prefer Scotland.
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Oh now that's just rude when there was already starting to be some decent shading..I mean he does make jabs at a certain webcomic that shall not be named but atleast that one has valid reasons for the jabs.HundKatzeMaus wrote:But what I really didn't like was that he took another jab at the shading of Housepets! during a review of another webcomic.
"Crimes?" "Crimes."
-
Shadowstar23
- Posts: 515
- Joined: Mon May 05, 2014 8:31 pm
- Location: Nowhere, Everywhere County
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
In general, I don't trust or listen to reviews as I prefer to experience things myself. Judging by the previous posts, I'm not even going to bother trying to watch this one. I am satisfied with Housepets the way it is.
There is always a mystical adventure awaiting you. You just have to find it and take the first step into epicness.
-
Mistacheeeez
- Posts: 155
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 9:38 am
- Location: Scouring the vast wastelands of the internet for any memes not yet devoured by the masses!
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Man, I wish I had read this entire thread before watching the 45 long, tedious minutes of the review... It makes sense that he'd make the video after stating that he was apparently bombarded with requests to review Housepets, but I'd say making a video 45 minutes long is a lot of overkill, not only that but, as many in this thread have already stated, it was pretty repetitive. Hearing him say "it's not my cup of tea" over and over again got really dull especially if your reasoning is 'it's not my cup of tea so I'm going to make sure everyone thinks so as well'.
Some of the things that got me the most were the fact that he said it was boring to have to read 8 years of it because it wasn't meant for someone to read all the way through, but honestly, rereading Housepets from the very beginning is my favorite part; getting to go through all the wacky highjinks and drama again and again each time with even more content and understanding is something I love, and something I've done many times!
Another thing that bugged me was his complaints about the art, while Housepets might have started off not the best looking, it's constant improvements have lead to this being one of the best looking webcomics out there and it doesn't need shading to still be great!
Yet another point I disliked was that, although the. cast page was especially outdated, it still gave more details if you just looked more closely. Although Fox's description may have seemed rudimentary, it also showed that Fox was loyal-willing to do things for his friends that personally went against his moral compass-as well as being smart and a bit anti-feline.
I could go on and on nit-picking this YouTuber (as it is I'll probably revise this and make it shorter...) but I also realize that a lot of it is his own opinion, and that, if I didn't like some popular thing, I'd probably go on a long rant to justify myself as well (which is kind of evident in this post...) Anyways, I wouldn't recommend his video at all, you can make your own opinions of this comic better by reading it for yourself than by listening to either someone hype it beyond belief or by someone hating on every little aspect of it... Especially if that someone spends 45 minutes doing so... (I could've watched a couple more episodes of Naruto in the time it took to watch him repeat himself and bore me to death!) So that's my opinion on this (because it's just soooooo important) and I mean no offense to either him or anyone who agreed with him if you happen to read this, I guess you could say "it juat wasn't my cup of tea"!
Some of the things that got me the most were the fact that he said it was boring to have to read 8 years of it because it wasn't meant for someone to read all the way through, but honestly, rereading Housepets from the very beginning is my favorite part; getting to go through all the wacky highjinks and drama again and again each time with even more content and understanding is something I love, and something I've done many times!
Another thing that bugged me was his complaints about the art, while Housepets might have started off not the best looking, it's constant improvements have lead to this being one of the best looking webcomics out there and it doesn't need shading to still be great!
Yet another point I disliked was that, although the. cast page was especially outdated, it still gave more details if you just looked more closely. Although Fox's description may have seemed rudimentary, it also showed that Fox was loyal-willing to do things for his friends that personally went against his moral compass-as well as being smart and a bit anti-feline.
I could go on and on nit-picking this YouTuber (as it is I'll probably revise this and make it shorter...) but I also realize that a lot of it is his own opinion, and that, if I didn't like some popular thing, I'd probably go on a long rant to justify myself as well (which is kind of evident in this post...) Anyways, I wouldn't recommend his video at all, you can make your own opinions of this comic better by reading it for yourself than by listening to either someone hype it beyond belief or by someone hating on every little aspect of it... Especially if that someone spends 45 minutes doing so... (I could've watched a couple more episodes of Naruto in the time it took to watch him repeat himself and bore me to death!) So that's my opinion on this (because it's just soooooo important) and I mean no offense to either him or anyone who agreed with him if you happen to read this, I guess you could say "it juat wasn't my cup of tea"!
I thought about changing my signature but decided against it, it's too much work!
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
Hooooooo boy, this review.
You know, I actually used to be a pretty big fan of his guy. He was the only person I knew of doing what he was doing, and at times, he'd be pretty good at it. Honestly, I really enjoy some of his positive reviews. When he likes something, he can really dig into what makes something work and make a good case for it. He actually ended up introducing me to a few comics here and there that I really enjoyed. When he doesn't like something, though, a review of his typically boils down to nearly an hour of "LOOK AT THIS CRAPPY COMIC LOLOLOL" with maybe a few decent points scattered here and there (see: Yosh!, the Las Lindas ten-parter). He's clearly trying to be a Channel Awesome type, but he doesn't have the right kind of humor for it. The end result is pretty, dare I say it, boring, which is ironically exactly the same way he felt about Housepets!.
Beyond that, though, he makes it abundantly clear that he didn't actually try to meaningfully engage the comic. The most telling moment is when he says that most dramatic element of the story is Peanut and Grape's romance (paraphrasing) while panning over a strip featuring King. I'll be honest, I didn't watch the review beyond the Premise section, so maybe he actually acknowledges some of the characters later on. Whatever the case, it shows that he wasn't really trying to give the comic a chance. Maybe he came in with jaded expectations because it was over-requested, but...ugh, okay, this is what makes me really upset.
This is a comic that people requested TWR to review because they enjoyed his show and they wanted to hear what he thought of something that had meaning to them. Let's put things into perspective here: TWR is not very popular. Most of his videos hover around 2,000 or so views at best, but even that is farther than most YouTubers go. So he has this small base of loyal subscribers who really want to know what he thinks about something they love, and the way he responds is belittling, dismissive, and honestly, kind of self-important. He acts like he's annoyed that his viewers keep requesting the comic, but keep in mind that these are the same viewers supporting your show and possibly even pledging to your Patreon--and you don't have that many of those to begin with. Even if he were a high-level Internet celebrity I'd think it was in poor taste, but to be at the level that he's at and to complain that people like his show enough to want him to review their favorite comic just...reflects poorly on his character. It's one thing to say "Hey sorry, guys, I know you really like this comic but I couldn't get into it personally and here's why." It's another entirely to say "oh my gosh this is soooooo BORING WHY DID YOU WANT ME TO REVIEW THIS AAAAAA THIS IS PUTTING ME TO SLEEEEEEEP WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE." The first is an honest opinion, the second comes off as a bit insulting to the people who are taking the time to follow your show.
And besides that, is it just me or is "boring" a...boring criticism in and of itself? (Ba dum tssh!) No, seriously, to say that something is boring legitimately means that there is nothing of interest worth commenting on--nothing to spend much time critiquing. So for a critic to spend an entire review making that point over and over and over again--let alone without giving any reasons why the object of criticism is boring--makes for a boring review in and of itself. I mean, I know I pretty much already said this earlier, but TWR isn't the only reviewer who has done this. I had the exact same problem with Rocked's Regretting the Past on Megadeth's Risk. If the biggest problem with something is that it's boring, then why even spend twenty minutes talking about it, let alone forty-five? At least try to find something you can talk about beyond the complete lack of anything interesting of note.
You know, I actually used to be a pretty big fan of his guy. He was the only person I knew of doing what he was doing, and at times, he'd be pretty good at it. Honestly, I really enjoy some of his positive reviews. When he likes something, he can really dig into what makes something work and make a good case for it. He actually ended up introducing me to a few comics here and there that I really enjoyed. When he doesn't like something, though, a review of his typically boils down to nearly an hour of "LOOK AT THIS CRAPPY COMIC LOLOLOL" with maybe a few decent points scattered here and there (see: Yosh!, the Las Lindas ten-parter). He's clearly trying to be a Channel Awesome type, but he doesn't have the right kind of humor for it. The end result is pretty, dare I say it, boring, which is ironically exactly the same way he felt about Housepets!.
Beyond that, though, he makes it abundantly clear that he didn't actually try to meaningfully engage the comic. The most telling moment is when he says that most dramatic element of the story is Peanut and Grape's romance (paraphrasing) while panning over a strip featuring King. I'll be honest, I didn't watch the review beyond the Premise section, so maybe he actually acknowledges some of the characters later on. Whatever the case, it shows that he wasn't really trying to give the comic a chance. Maybe he came in with jaded expectations because it was over-requested, but...ugh, okay, this is what makes me really upset.
This is a comic that people requested TWR to review because they enjoyed his show and they wanted to hear what he thought of something that had meaning to them. Let's put things into perspective here: TWR is not very popular. Most of his videos hover around 2,000 or so views at best, but even that is farther than most YouTubers go. So he has this small base of loyal subscribers who really want to know what he thinks about something they love, and the way he responds is belittling, dismissive, and honestly, kind of self-important. He acts like he's annoyed that his viewers keep requesting the comic, but keep in mind that these are the same viewers supporting your show and possibly even pledging to your Patreon--and you don't have that many of those to begin with. Even if he were a high-level Internet celebrity I'd think it was in poor taste, but to be at the level that he's at and to complain that people like his show enough to want him to review their favorite comic just...reflects poorly on his character. It's one thing to say "Hey sorry, guys, I know you really like this comic but I couldn't get into it personally and here's why." It's another entirely to say "oh my gosh this is soooooo BORING WHY DID YOU WANT ME TO REVIEW THIS AAAAAA THIS IS PUTTING ME TO SLEEEEEEEP WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE." The first is an honest opinion, the second comes off as a bit insulting to the people who are taking the time to follow your show.
And besides that, is it just me or is "boring" a...boring criticism in and of itself? (Ba dum tssh!) No, seriously, to say that something is boring legitimately means that there is nothing of interest worth commenting on--nothing to spend much time critiquing. So for a critic to spend an entire review making that point over and over and over again--let alone without giving any reasons why the object of criticism is boring--makes for a boring review in and of itself. I mean, I know I pretty much already said this earlier, but TWR isn't the only reviewer who has done this. I had the exact same problem with Rocked's Regretting the Past on Megadeth's Risk. If the biggest problem with something is that it's boring, then why even spend twenty minutes talking about it, let alone forty-five? At least try to find something you can talk about beyond the complete lack of anything interesting of note.
*cough*
Re: Webcomic Relief: Housepets!
*drinks your cup of tea* GOOD!Mistacheeeez wrote:Man, I wish I had read this entire thread before watching the 45 long, tedious minutes of the review... It makes sense that he'd make the video after stating that he was apparently bombarded with requests to review Housepets, but I'd say making a video 45 minutes long is a lot of overkill, not only that but, as many in this thread have already stated, it was pretty repetitive. Hearing him say "it's not my cup of tea" over and over again got really dull especially if your reasoning is 'it's not my cup of tea so I'm going to make sure everyone thinks so as well'.
Some of the things that got me the most were the fact that he said it was boring to have to read 8 years of it because it wasn't meant for someone to read all the way through, but honestly, rereading Housepets from the very beginning is my favorite part; getting to go through all the wacky highjinks and drama again and again each time with even more content and understanding is something I love, and something I've done many times!
Another thing that bugged me was his complaints about the art, while Housepets might have started off not the best looking, it's constant improvements have lead to this being one of the best looking webcomics out there and it doesn't need shading to still be great!
Yet another point I disliked was that, although the. cast page was especially outdated, it still gave more details if you just looked more closely. Although Fox's description may have seemed rudimentary, it also showed that Fox was loyal-willing to do things for his friends that personally went against his moral compass-as well as being smart and a bit anti-feline.
I could go on and on nit-picking this YouTuber (as it is I'll probably revise this and make it shorter...) but I also realize that a lot of it is his own opinion, and that, if I didn't like some popular thing, I'd probably go on a long rant to justify myself as well (which is kind of evident in this post...) Anyways, I wouldn't recommend his video at all, you can make your own opinions of this comic better by reading it for yourself than by listening to either someone hype it beyond belief or by someone hating on every little aspect of it... Especially if that someone spends 45 minutes doing so... (I could've watched a couple more episodes of Naruto in the time it took to watch him repeat himself and bore me to death!) So that's my opinion on this (because it's just soooooo important) and I mean no offense to either him or anyone who agreed with him if you happen to read this, I guess you could say "it juat wasn't my cup of tea"!