Reviews Series / Deadliest Warrior

I stopped watching after the first season...

Well there's yer problem.

300 was not in a release date anywhere near Spartan VS Ninja.

And if you want to put a chunk of your review talking about how you stopped watching and what you heard, that's kind of a problem.

You're right, it is a problem. It's a problem when a series is so boring I have never wasted another minute of my life watching it, nor been interested in watching it again.

I will give you, I didn't bother to research the release date of 300 with the episode of Ninja vs. Spartan. I honestly felt comfortable making the comparison because of the media impact 300 seemed to have. There are still people referencing lines from that movie 4 years later. That pairing right there is strange, they pitted a light weight, high speed, stealth based fighter against a well-armed military unit that fights in large groups using their Phalanx. If anything, they should have done the Pirate vs. Ninja and Spartan vs. Knight, it would have made a little more sense then.

^...You've been watching too many fictional ninjas.

How so?

Nevermind, totally misread that.

"they should have done the Pirate vs. Ninja"

About that, why did it ever become a thing? Priates got guns. End of discussion.

Discussion resumed. "Priates" should be pirates. End of discussion for real this time.

Pitting the Ninja against the Spartan does have obvious issues, but that has more to do with the information that early version of the sim could handle. Let's face it the Ninja historically faced the heavily armoured, well armed, and highly trained Samuri, and one - that is what made it look good on paper. That really is the biggest problem with the one sided matchups, they looked good on paper. Often it is the technical issues that take it from being good on paper to a horrible mess of an episode (and I am including the poor choice of focus in these technical issues) but even then these episodes do still tend to get a few thinks right, or at least show something interesting. It is hard to hold stock in this review in that the reviewer admitts that they have not even watched the full series to date, and thus can not be expected to be knowedgeable enough about its content to be accurate in their assessment of its quality.

You're right, it is a problem. It's a problem when a series is so boring I have never wasted another minute of my life watching it, nor been interested in watching it again.

Yes. It's a problem when you want to try and write a review on a whole series, then proceed to say "I didn't even watch it all the way". It's invalidating your own opinion.

I don't care if you hate it or love it. But bite the bullet and watch the whole thing if you want to review the whole series. First impressions are not reviews.

Dude, you said that it's bad...and that's about it. You need to give more info than that if you want to make a valid complaint, I have no idea WHY you don't like the show, making this review useless to me.

@ Glixinator This may sound like a criticism, but it's actually a genuine question (the criticism will come later). The ninja faced off against the heavily armed samurai? Is that actually true? I thought Ninjas were spies and assassins but so much knowledge of them is just pop culture, I can't really tell. Because I thought they were meant to get info and take out leaders/etc than fight against targets, so did they actually often beat Samurai?

@Terminus + @Glixinator Anyway start/criticism you can't really dig into the review for not watching all of it, because 'so bad I stopped watching it' is something useful info. Now you are right that it's not completely useful because you can't judge much more than you've seen, so if you do a review based on that bit of knowledge then the reviewer has to make it clear they've only seen a limited part of it, but I feel the reviewer did do that hear.

I mean if we think about it logically, if a reviewer were only allowed to review something they've fully experienced, then that would create a huge positive review bias for long running shows. If I hated lost from the start, am I really going to spend another 100 solid hours of my life watching it? Even if someone was paying me they'd have to pay me for that time which means I'd be expecting a heck of a lot of money for that review and even then I'm not sure if I would do it. That would either be an expensive binge week of hell or, what a year of slow torture?

So that means in any series that lasted, say more than 20 hours, then all the people who've disliked it would have given up and gone home. If we only allow people who watch all of it, we'll only have positive reviews of a series that is bad enough to put people off watching it.

I agree you can't have a fully inclusive opinion, but what we have learnt is, in the eyes of this reviewer the first series of this show is absolutely rubbish. That's worth knowing. What's more, because very few shows change completely in one season, we can guess he'd probably not like a lot of the rest of it. The show may well get better but unfortunately there we come up against a problem that unless the series is dip-in-able we don't really have a way to get an accurate review of it. But that's an imperfection of the world. I think it's harsh to ask Nelo to solve it :D

"^...You've been watching too many fictional ninjas."

And the writers for the show don't? Hint: Ninjatos probably do not exist.

Also, I don't think OP committed any sort of faux pas. His review was about the first season, why he didn't like it and why he would have no interest in continuing any further.