Dethroning Moment / MatPat

These moments would make us scream, "But hey, that's just a moment! A Dethroning Moment! Thanks for editing!"

Keep in mind:

• Sign your entries
• One moment per work to a troper; if multiple entries for the same work are signed to the same troper, the more recent one(s) will be cut. For subpages that cover multiple works, it's permissible for one troper to have entries for more than one work.
• Moments only, no "just everything he said", "the entire episode", or "this entire work," entries.
• No contesting entries. This is subjective, the entry is their opinion.
• No natter. As above, anything contesting an entry will be cut, and anything that's just contributing more can be made its own entry.
• Explain why it's a Dethroning Moment of Suck.
• No ALLCAPS, no bold, and no italics unless it's the title of a work. We are not yelling the DMoSs out loud.
• Please no He Panned It, Now He Sucks!. Someone having a different opinion than you is not nearly a good enough justification for something being seen as stupid or offensive.
• Creator's works only. No moments on the author themselves or personal experience with them.

---

Game Theory

• Fart Rocket Physics with the Wario Waft
  • Xaviorthe Savior: This moment is so bad, his own fans are calling bullshit. In the episode discussing the real life physics behind the Wario Waft, he somehow determines that Wario is 10 feet tall. As if it were bad enough that simply looking at Wario could tell you that he is nowhere near that height, the top rated comment on that video also points out that this contradicts an earlier video of his where he stated that Peach is 5'10" and the height chart he provides in the video clearly shows Wario as being shorter than her. Admittedly, Matthew has owned up to this mistake, and mocks himself for it.
• "Why Mario is Mental" two-parter:
  • bowserbros: Game Theory is a show that I've always had mixed feelings about. Whether it's from his fandom touting MatPat's theories as fact to said theories often ranging from outlandish to controversial, I've never thought too fondly of him and even got pissed off at him more than once. However, this video has pissed me off more than any other, in which Matt diagnoses Mario with Antisocial Personality Disorder using biased in-game evidence. Throughout the video, he makes astonishing errors in his background information, such as antagonizing Mario for killing the Wiggler in Super Mario Sunshine despite it being an invasive threat to a presumably endangered creature. Every single one of his points is hampered by one crucial error that he refuses to acknowledge, and he takes all of his arguments to their logical extremes. His most notable error is claiming that Mario shows one symptom of ASPD by focusing his interests towards Pauline in the Mario vs. Donkey Kong series, claiming that he's willing to make a toy of her and not a Peach toy when one clearly shows up in a bit of in-game footage used at an earlier point in his video. When trying to verify that Mario displays womanizing habits common amongst ASPD sufferers, he attempts to prove both of his points using fan-made timelines, apparently oblivious to the fact that the Mario franchise has hardly any chronology. Furthermore, he takes a very clear anti-Mario bias in the video, making mountains out of molehills using minor details in several Mario games. This includes interpreting Mario stepping on Luigi's foot in Mario Power Tennis as an act of sociopathy rather than sibling rivalry, viewing Mario cuing Yoshi to stick his tongue out in Super Mario World as him punching the green dinosaur, interpreting Mario's ambiguous role in Donkey Kong Circus as an abusive master (whereas the in-game instructions make him seem more like an audience member), and, most egregiously, overlooking the entire Mario & Luigi series, where the Mario Bros. care for and work with each other every step of the way, just to find more evidence in other games to prove his argument that Mario is a sibling abuser. Later in the video, he puts Mario in a sociopathic light because he shows no remorse to killing enemies, a trait common for most playable characters in video games as a means of letting the player project themselves onto who they're controlling; he even compares it to a form of Southeast Asian torture where an elephant crushes a person's limbs & head, ignoring the fact that enemies' deaths in Mario games happens instantaneously. I suppose that by his logic, one could assume that all video games glamourize sociopaths. He additionally focuses heavily on the fact that the Toads in the original Super Mario Bros. were turned into bricks, misinterpreting "bricks" as "brick blocks" and trying to call Mario out for apparently destroying hundreds of Toads and being rewarded points for it. Not only that, but he also implies that this curse, which Mario is likely to have been unaware of in the first place, carries over to all other Mario games. What seals the deal is the fact that Matt goes against his "But that's just a theory; a Game Theory!" ethos by confidently touting how he can definitely state that Mario is a psycho, implying that he views this theory as fact. With a video filled to the brim with so many research errors, oversights, and biases, this is definitely the lowest Game Theory has ever gotten.
  • Melancholy Utopia: Agree 100%. This whole video was a disaster. Mat, do you perhaps got the wrong definition of the words "research" and "objective"? Because you're horrible when it comes to both. You can't just completely ignore every moment where Mario has been genuinely nice to someone, especially Luigi (aforementioned Mario & Luigi series and Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, anyone?) and then exaggerate Mario's supposedly villainous actions subjectively to prove your point as "correct". That's not how you handle a debate effectively. To be a successful debater, you must take every counter argument into account and then crush them with valid points from your side of the spectrum. But you did naught of it. To rub salt into the wound, he used in-game footage from the Mario & Luigi series earlier in the video, so the excuse that he has never played them is invalid. I was already skeptical of his videos, but this video just put the final nail in the coffin for me.
  • Wingnut: What personally got to me was how Mat counts Mario "standing there" in Mario is Missing as a lack of appreciation for Luigi saving him. What does he expect from the limited amount of animations and facial expressions at the time? For all we know, Mario and Luigi could be celebrating with a brotherly staring contest or something.
  • Metalhead Nefarious: The Mario is Missing argument irked me as well. Mat says that Mario never says "thank you" despite the fact in the next screen, there is a big "THANK YOU" from Mario.
  • shonengirl: Quite honestly, I've been very disappointed by MatPat for a while. Whether it be the increasingly style-over-substance, poorly researched content where he tends to spectacularly shoot himself in the foot and yet remain blissfully unaware of it, his love of the Ron the Death Eater and Draco in Leather Pants tropes, or his ego and ignorance of Satoru Iwata's death. FilmTheory is somewhat better, and even GT seems to be improving slightly, but still, this video was pretty much where all the problems of modern Game Theory really started to show; there were traces shown in the Kirby theory (which sounded like a joke anyway) and the second Pokemon theory (the age-old "Pokemon is animal abuse!"), but this marks the point the issues started to get bad. You whined about people calling the Undertale theory the moment where Game Theory Jumped The Shark? (Nice moment by the way. How humble.) Yeah, you've Jumped The Shark a long while ago, pal. Though admittedly, it only fully jumped it sometime after the thumbnails started to get black backgrounds. When I first saw this pop up, I kind of rolled my eyes but thought "Okay, I'll just listen to what he has to say". And let's just say that a certain 14-year-old's mental forehead was sore for a while that day. Yes, this thing is so bad a 14-year-old can see through it. And I had just turned 14, too. That's a really bad sign. I have not much to add and almost everything I could have said was said perfectly by the first entry and further by subsequent ones, so here's TheMetalBlade5 (skip to around 31:36 for the latter video), defawfullizer (skip to around 21:40 for the latter video), and MangaKamen's debunking videos of this really abysmal video, as they also say almost everything I wanted to (the latter is the best one, however, due to it being of objective higher quality). What I do have to add, however; two things, one, Mat, you know that a more recent video of yours proves part of your own theory wrong, right? No acknowledgement of that? No? And two, do you even know what "sibling rivalry" or heck, even arguing among friends or loved ones is? You know, MatPat, as someone with two brothers and parents who fought a lot with their siblings, and someone who knows that even the closest of people can argue amongst each other because that's just common sense, the part with Mario apparently abusing Luigi made me facepalm particularly hard, thorough it was against some stiff competition. Sure, grinding his foot is a rather... strange way to show sibling rivalry, but it was harmless nonetheless. Apparently, this married adult has no understanding of basic human nature that, I repeat, a kid who had just turned 14 with Asperger's Syndrome knew for years. How do you even socialize, man?! I'll continue to enjoy some of his content, though I'm much more cautious now on clicking them, since he actually does put out a good video now and again (I liked the Blue's Ratticate theory, but even that left much to be desired and I wish he provided more evidence to shut down that old, stupid, grimdark theory further, and FilmTheory has some gems, i.e. his Don't Hug Me I'm Scared, Simpsons and Dragon Ball videos, though if stuff like the Zootopia and Finding Dory theories are any indication, this seemingly quality unfortunately didn't last long...) and I just hope this is just a phase and he gets his act together. Or that something gets through that thick skull of his and he actually listens to criticism.
  • Arend: MatPat started his theory about E. Gadd being morally ambiguous with an addendum to this theory, specifically about Mario hitting Yoshi, so I decided to add it here. Now at the time (two years ago, close to the SNES Classic/Mini release), various beta elements of Super Mario World have been brought to light by the developers in an interview. This includes the fact that Mario originally was hitting Yoshi. MatPat took that information and decided that his theory about Mario abusing Yoshi is confirmed... without realizing there was emphasis on the word "was". The developers originally had Mario punch Yoshi in the head so he shoots out his tongue in surprise, but the developers changed that to Mario pointing and yelling "Go!", because people would feel sorry to poor Yoshi for getting hit in the head. MatPat glossed over that entire second part and only focused on the part of Mario punching Yoshi, smug about his theory being confirmed, when it's in fact debunked. After all, Mario hitting Yoshi is a beta element, and not part of the final product.
• The "Real" Villain of Mega Man.:
  • Mariic: In the video, MatPat claims that it's not Dr. Wily's fault that innocent people got hurt, but Dr. Light's because he created all the robot masters. Stop. Out of all the robot masters through all of the original games, Dr. Light was only responsible for creating the ones in Mega Man, Mega Man 3, and Mega Man 9. All of those times, they were reprogrammed by Dr. Wily, and in 1 & 3, the Robot Masters were also built by Doctor Wily.
  • PrinceDoebler: When he points out what Mega Man says about being "more than just a robot", he fails to recognize/acknowledge that this line was shoehorned in by the localization team. In the original script, he cancels his charge (which he does in the NTSC version anyway) and is caught short in his speech. This completely discredits Mat's theory. I have to think that he deliberately ignores anything that proves him wrong.
• UNDERTALE - Sans' SECRET Identity!
  • n00dl3Gal: His theory about Sans' identity. I knew simply from the thumbnail it was going to be bad- not to mention it spoiled the whole theory- but holy shit was MatPat grasping at straws. Yes, Undertale was made by Toby Fox, who previously made an Earthbound Halloween rom hack. Yes, there are a handful of references to Earthbound throughout Undertale. But to legitimately use the whole "Sans is only a vowel off from Ness" as evidence is just offensive and stupid. Even Toby himself knocked the theory on Twitter [1].
  • Goji Biscuits: As for the finale, it's even worse. Jumping to a huge conclusion (while also leaping over a shark), our 'viable and reliable source' states that Papyrus, a skeleton composed of organic material, is a Starman, a robot who would have been unchanged by the effects of the Phase Distorter. Ignoring the question as to why a killer robot would end up having the mentality of an over-enthusiastic child after using the PD and ending up in the Underground, why would such a robot willingly enter a machine with its worst enemy?
• "Why I Gave The Pope UNDERTALE":
  • SCP Ihpkmn: MatPat got to meet Pope Francis, representing Youtube. They couldn't have found anyone else? Maybe John or Hank Green, two actually intelligent, humble people who do research and consult experts on the subjects they discuss? Or maybe some big Letsplayer that does charity streams on a regular basis, something the Pope might approve of? That's not a dethroning moment, however- no, it's the fact that he's so smug in the video where he talks about being able to do such a thing. On top of that, he practically laughs at the fact that the Undertale theory got such hate. He doesn't address criticism of it, he doesn't concede that he might have been wrong on some points. He just, basically, says "deal with it". That actually made me angry.
  • supernintendo128: I withdraw my previous DMoS. This is the single worst episode of Game Theory I have ever seen. I literally thought that this video was some sort of joke when I first saw it on my frontpage. The first half of the video is him gloating about how he got to meet the Pope and talking about how great he is and haphazardly defending his "Sans is Ness" video for good measure and then only like a minute or two of the actual educational stuff. The DMoS comes with the second half of the video where he goes on to rant about how oppressed gamers because of how we are misinterpreted in the media and then proceeds to compare our "oppression" with Muslims and homosexuals using the 2016 Pulse Nightclub Shootings which seems a bit disrespectful to them. The worst that gamers endured is that they were called names like "murderers" whereas gays have gone through centuries of persecution (with some countries even hanging gays) and Muslims are outright being shunned by U.S. society and face the threat of being banned from the country because of the 9/11 and the aforementioned Pulse Club Shootings. He then blows the results of his action of giving a copy of Undertale to the Pope out of proportion by talking about how it will help people understand us in a more positive light because of how Undertale encourages peace... except that the Pope doesn't own a computer and won't even get to play the game. MatPat tries to justify this because it's a "symbolic gift" but this excuse falls flat on its face because you have to play the game to actually get the symbolism. I've lost any respect I had for you previously, MatPat, because I don't think I can ever look at you the same way ever again after this video.
• Luigi's SECRET Identity (''Super Paper Mario'')
  • SenorCornholio: I was thinking about going with the "Sans is Ness" theory because of how utterly stupid that sounds (not to mention it's a very flimsy excuse to connect Undertale to his favorite game of all time), but I found something even more horrid that has to do with his Mario videos (Of course!). After his initial "Mario is Mental" video, he later made two videos, the former of which demonizing Peach and the latter giving Bowser a Freudian Excuse (granted, I do agree with the latter video if only for the reason that it technically still makes the Koopalings Bowser's kids). Then he goes onto make a video about how Luigi is secretly evil now, simply to fill his "bastardizing beloved video game characters" quota for the big four of Super Mario Bros.. As bad as that video is (see this rebuttal for more info on that matter), the DMoS in it is the beginning and end that implies that MatPat gets some sort of sick thrill from these theories, and that each one is just a trophy to hang on a mantle. This actually left a bit of a bad taste in my mouth; instead of taking back all of these theories, or at least trying to justify them a bit further, he seems to outright revel in them to the point that he's been waiting for the day that he gets to make Luigi out to be less noble than he actually is and found hypnosis to be a perfect excuse. "Ex-Mario fanboy" my foot! This even goes against the aforementioned "Mental" video where he's shown on Luigi's side, lambasting Mario for (supposedly) being an abusive brother to Luigi. What the hell happened to Mat between then and now? Or was he even taking these Mario-based "theories" seriously to begin with? In addition to that, my biggest Berserk Button is when a creator seems to be trolling their fanbase, as some of my entries on other works will attest to; and I don't just mean a light teasing, I mean wholly and willingly taunting them going "Nya, nya, nya nyaaaanya~!" Because this came off as not only sadistic, but also an outright middle finger to anyone who disagrees with the theory, that only made it worse for me. I'll continue to watch Game Theory on occasion as I no longer watch his videos all that often, but this was just...yeah, I'm surprised YouTube still lets him make a living off of these, too.
  • Sirsomeguy: Seconded, but I feel I should give more meat to this video and why it's such a bad case of Bias Steamroller on MatPat's part. The entirety of the theory hinges on a singular game in the Mario franchise, Super Paper Mario, and upon finding this single case of Luigi's darker side, blankets it over the entire Mario series. That is a terrible way to do this! Not only does it show a lack of understanding the complexities of a character's actions among an entire franchise by going "Yeah, but this one time he was bad, so therefore he's bad!". MatPat spends a good amount of time explaining the difference between hypnotizing and brainwashing, and what type of brainwashing it is. In the end, he says that Luigi is put in a suggestive state that would cause him to only do what doesn't go against his own morals and acts as just an idea that if he wanted to, he'll do... completely forgetting that this was shown twice before to convince Peach to marry Bowser, and cause some of Bowser's most devout and loyal minions to turn on him and join Bleck, which is NOT suggestive, as those go against their own morals. This again shows MatPat loving just turning the other way to information that disproves him and continuing on his flawed rhetoric. This is especially notorious in how not once, in the entire video, does he ever so much as mention the existence of Mario & Luigi: Dream Team, a game that quite literally has Mario enter Luigi's head, and show that at his core, what drives Luigi is his devotion to protect and help his brother in the same way he protects him. This irks me so much because this could easily be the topic for a really good theory, using real life knowledge on psychology and dream analysis to review Luigi's character, applying real world science to fiction, making a new video where we all can learn something new and nuanced and in a way that shows love and devotion to these characters. But no. He'd rather make a video about how in the end, all the heroes that people love are evil in their heart, and that you are a sheep for seeing them as such. It's such a negative outlook, and the fact that he's so willing to overlook information that disproves him is just the icing on a very, very sour cake.
    • DevNameless: I would personally like to call out the misunderstanding that Nastasia's brainwashing was just "putting Luigi into a suggestive state" as my DMOS, because I can't personally believe he was even fully aware of what he was talking about. He wants to imply that her brainwashing means the people she brainwashes only do things that go against their morals, which is completely debunked at the very beginning of the game by Nastasia using her brainwashing to make Peach agree to marry Bowser. Not only is that something Peach would very much disagree to do, but it goes against her nature to such a degree as to break reality in-game, creating the Chaos Heart and the Void. You can't suggest that Nastasia's powers only makes her able to make the brainwashed do what they wouldn't mind doing when the very catalyst for the game is her using it to make Peach do something so completely out-of-character for her that it threatens to destroy all of existence.
• Fallout, Boom! Headshot!
  • North Wind Gray: We see the usual with Mat's earlier videos - he presents his evidence, then makes his call. He concludes that, no, the Courier could not have survived the opening of the game because Benny fired two shots, and therefore the game was a dream lived out in the Courier's last moments. While the real life evidence is all fine and dandy, MatPat neglected to realize that real life evidence means very little in the game and, upon investigation, two headshots from Maria simply WOULD NOT kill the Courier, even with Endurance at 1 and at level 1, in gameplay, even if Benny had a maxed Guns stat, which he doesn't. The verdict is that Mat got a tad bit carried away and forgot about Gameplay and Story Integration.
• Phoenix Wright is a criminal.
  • Dr Zulu 2010: This video could be on the same level as his "Mario is Mental" theories when it comes to demonizing beloved video game heroes. For starters, he claims that Phoenix is the worst villain in the series by showing out of nowhere evidence that the prosecution can't counter. First of all, every attorney is doing the same thing; in fact, Edgeworth gave the judge the infamous "updated autopsy report" in case 1-2. Second of all, the prosecutors Edgeworth and Manfred Von Karma are known to make forged evidence and using dirty handed tactics in order to have a guilty verdict. Again, the "updated autopsy report" is a good example or Von Karma stealing every piece of evidence about the DL-6 incident and tazing both Phoenix and Maya. Also, at the end, he claims that Phoenix is tampering with evidence by taking the receipt with Maya's name to hide her involvement in the murder of Mia Fey, his mentor and Maya's sister, showing that he might have a short memory span, since Phoenix never took the receipt; he registered it to his court record (unlike in most adventure games, Phoenix doesn't take evidence unless it's something small enough to fit his pants) and the reason why Gumshoe took away Maya is because he saw the receipt and comes to the conclusion that Maya may have done it (something that is even shown in the video). Lastly, it's pretty clear that despite what he said about clearing the game, he never played Case 1-5 since this case explains how the Evidence Law works in the Ace Attorney universe. This video is a clear show of how much MatPat has fallen in case of theories. He twists the truth about the games, he cherry picks evidence and he ignores in-game facts about the characters, settings and lore of the games. What happened to the intelligent MatPat of old and what have you done with him?
  • Izzy Uneasy: Plus he claimed that nobody ever played Ace Attorney, but everyone knows the meme. Must I even explain what is wrong here?
• "Wii U is the New Virtual Boy"
  • legorunnerkid: I used to be a fan of Game Theory but over the years, I haven't watched a lot of it, though I do sometimes. MatPat can make a decent theory sometimes but he isn't perfect. This theory I am showing here, while not the worst Game Theory episode, it isn't the best either. I can go over on how MatPat's comparisons to the Wii U to the Virtual Boy don't make sense or every other moment but my biggest DMoS comes in when MatPat starts talking about the cost. He states that the Wii U is expensive by adding costs to it. He first states that you need a battery pack for the console even though the console is rechargeable so you don't need a battery pack. The Wii Remote is also not needed since many Wii U owners might already have one because they owned the Wii. And finally... MatPat says that you need a game because the console didn't come with it. Ignoring the fact that some Wii U bundles do have games in them, my issue is that this applies to almost (if not, all) every video game console that exists! Dafawfulizer made a great point in his Top 9 worst Game Theory videos countdown where he compares it complaining about an oven that doesn't come with food. Even then, you still have to buy another game if it isn't the one you wanted.
• batmany: I've mostly considered MatPat's videos to be little more than poorly-researched clickbait, and his FNAF theory videos tend to be the worst offenders. But, good lord, did I find his most recent Final FNAF Theory Pt 1 video to be my personal choice of DMOS for his channel. I couldn't even sit through the whole thing, that's how bad it was. First off, he rambles on and on about how he had scrapped other ideas for the video but felt they took too long and were too boring. MatPat, rambling about something being boring is also very boring to your audience. Get to the point, please. After that pointless tedium, he starts to get to the point of the video. That, of course, being his own interpretation of the FNAF timeline, the Afton family, and how it all connects to the games. He even said he used The Freddy Files as "research" (I use the term loosely) and as "evidence" (again, used loosely) for his theory. OK, the "FNAF Timeline" concept has been overdone but I figured maybe MatPat had something new to bring to the table. Maybe he'd have some interesting new concepts regarding the Afton family. And....wow, what I saw was a huge disappointment and the main reason I stopped watching the video. Why? Well, he gets so much wrong in so little time. He says there's two Purple Guys, which is correct. But, he says they're "William" and "Billy" Afton and says none of the other Afton family are named. Uh, no, not even close. There is no "Billy" Afton. The only other named Afton in the game series is "Michael Afton" AKA the second Purple Guy AKA Springtrap (maybe). What we don't know is the name of Michael's mother, sister, or whether or not Michael is The Brother or The Child (or neither) from FNAF 4. All MatPat would have to do is a simple look-up on the FNAF Wiki or even this freakin' website to know the names of the characters. Likewise, he states that Sister Location takes place after FNAF 2. Again, no. We know Sister Location takes place after FNAF 1 because of two things. One, Handunit clearly states that Freddy Fazbear's went out of business which is what happens in FNAF 1. Freddy Fazbear's was still in business in FNAF 2 but was downsizing due to the various tragedies that happened over such a short period of time. Two, the Custom Night cutscenes show Michael's transformation into the second Purple Guy and the Golden Freddy cutscene reveals he's (possibly) Springtrap and still very much alive after Fazbear's Fright burned down. This means that the events of Sister Location would have to take place sometime after FNAF 1 and before FNAF 3. Again, this is something Matpat could easily look up using either the FNAF wiki or even on this website. Heck, he could've simply prevented himself from getting so much wrong by simply playing the games. Matpat, please, if you're going to make any more theory videos on FNAF, do everyone a favor and actually get basic facts on the games and lore beforehand.
• The Metroid Morph Ball is LAME!
  • Superfield: The moment I decided that Game Theory wasn't worth my time was when I watched his episode on why the Morph Ball is lame. Somehow, he wasn't able to come up with any upside for turning into a ball outside of becoming shorter. How can someone possibly call their show "The Smartest Show in Gaming" when they don't think through things like how crawling would be far less effective than rolling, especially in the Morph Ball sections that Samus regularly traverses? Or how she's shown in cutscenes using it to evade attacks that she probably couldn't while walking in the bulky armor? Armor which, by the way, would make curling into a ball pretty difficult, making the powerup all the more impressive. Terrible, forced and hackneyed conclusion all to justify the clickbait thumbnail he came up with.
• Exposing Metroid's HIDDEN Threat (Super Metroid)
  • Kenji115: As someone who was already disillusioned with Game Theory's content, this episode represents the point where I had to throw in the towel and give up hope for the channel entirely. Not only does this video contain some of the worst and most frequent examples of Game Theory's trademark errors it is single handedly the worst and most incorrect misunderstanding of a work of fiction I have ever witnessed. However, there are problems outside of the theory itself that you have to wade through before getting to the rancid meat of Matthew's content. Starting out, the video takes ages to get to a point, as Mat decides gushing about Awesome Games Done Quick is a good way to pad out the video's run time. I understand that as the video was made in 2016, GDQ was the only relevant thing to tie a Metroid video back to, but spending 4 minutes in your 14 minute video rambling about irrelevant info isn't good script writing. Secondly, the title blatantly lies to the viewer, telling them to expect a Super Metroid based theory, but the majority of the video's content is actually based around Metroid Fusion. He also again takes an incredibly biased stance against the subject of the theory, the Etecoons and Dachoras (referred to collectively as 'The Animals'). The basis of the theory is that the player should not feel guilty for letting the Animals die to save time in a speedrun, and he does this by attaching villainous qualities to characters who do not display any, a habit he seems to relish in. In canon, Samus saved the Animals at the end of Super Metroid, as revealed when they reappear in Metroid Fusion. Matthew attempts to get us to believe that the Animals are responsible for the X Parasite outbreak aboard the BSL Space Station, but his reasoning is so flimsy that even well-known Youtubers like Some Call Me Johnny called him out in the comments section. Matthew makes a number of errors while talking about the game's story, the sheer number of which makes it easy to argue that he's never actually played Metroid Fusion, or experienced any Metroid game outside of as a speedrun viewer. For example: He misidentifies the Omega Metroid from the end of Fusion as an X Copy; this is impossible, as X are absorbed by Metroids upon contact. He also makes the claim that Metroids suddenly appeared and began attacking civilization; this is not the case, as the Inciting Incident for the Metroid series has always been the Space Pirates poaching Metroids from SR388 for weaponization. These errors pale in comparison to his main argument, that the Animals are X Hosts and the reason the conflict of Metroid Fusion began. For one, the premise makes no sense, as for the theory to function, the Animals would have had to be infected by X on Zebes during the events of Super Metroid. This poses 2 major problems. First, anybody who's played Fusion or Metroid: Samus Returns can tell you X Parasites are native to SR388 and never existed anywhere else outside of the BSL space station. Secondly, it makes no sense for the X, who instinctively destroy and copy any life they can find, to sit still on Zebes and not cause damage. Had there been a single X infected life form on Zebes, the story of Super Metroid would have been drastically different. He also misidentifies the ruined Chozo Ship as belonging to the Animals, even though 5 seconds of research can tell you it was a Chozo ship. Matthew attempts to use the Dachora's Shinespark ability and the Animals' ability to pilot spaceships as evidence that they are X hosts, but these arguments are also fundamentally flawed. The Chozo have been stated multiple times to have based their technology off the natural world around them, implying that the Dachora inspired the Speed Booster, rather than the Speed Booster being copied by the Dachora. Second, the X are specifically stated to not be capable of flying ships, as if they had copied an able pilot, they would have left BSL and started infecting other worlds. Matthew also questions how the Animals were "randomly passed over" by the X, but this also has an explanation if he bothered to read the game's dialogue. The Animals were in the Habitation Deck, the one room on BSL that wasn't compromised by Samus and Adam overriding the station's security protocols. He also questions how they could have made it to Samus' shuttle without being attacked, but the space between the Habitation Deck and the airlock is very short with very little danger, and the Animals are already established to talented in evasive maneuvers like wall-jumping and shinesparking. Matthew also has an egregious misunderstanding of how the X operate. He claims that since Samus eradicated the Metroid Population on SR388, a "smarter strain" of X would trust her to destroy their predator. However, the X do not operate on logical thought, are unaware Samus destroyed the Metroids, and wouldn't care even if they were because her Metroid DNA makes her a direct threat to their survival. However, even with all this counter evidence, there are still 2 arguments Matthew makes that digs him further into the sinkhole he's stepped into. First, Matthew forgets that the X Infection was started by the SA-X using a power bomb to break out of the Quarantine Bay, spreading X throughout the facility. Matthew seems to totally forget about this major story hook, claiming that the outbreak's origin is "conveniently unexplained". Finally, even after all of this, the final nail in the coffin is struck with the fact the Adam, Samus' on-board computer, runs a diagnostic on the Animals, and tells you to your face they avoided infection. This "theory" is so wrong on so many fundamental levels that it deserves to be deleted. It's the worst example of Matthew cherry-picking evidence. It's the worst I've ever seen anybody fail to comprehend the plot of a fictional story. It offers no valid points, no critical thought, and no entertainment value. Metroid fans, please only watch this video if you feel like getting intensely frustrated, because I felt no other emotion subjecting myself to it.
• Who Would Win - Samurai, Knight, or Viking? (For Honor)
  • Albert 3105: This, in my opinion, surpasses any of his infamous Mario theories in utter suckage. The amount of errors (at least three a minute, give or take) is staggering. As for a single worst part of the episode? It's the pitting of the opponents itself. Here, he throws literally all research whatsoever out the window. The Viking is stated to have a spear and shield earlier in the theory, yet the Viking never uses them in the deathmatch proper. There's also the "superior martial arts" remark, as if martial arts was an exclusively Asian concept.
  • creepingdeath: When history Youtubers Skallagrim, Shadiversity, and Metatron each separately make a 12 to 20 minute video debunking the misconseptions and poor research. The 3 videos have very little overlap, and each person has different background specialties, Vikings for Skallagrim, knights for Shadiversity and samurai for Metatron.
• Game Theory: Who is W.D. Gaster? (Undertale)
  • Kevjro 7: This isn't about the theory itself, but rather the 5 minute detour he spent being a whiny bitch about the criticisms he got for his previous Undertale videos. First of all, he says that there was a petition that wanted him removed from the Internet, but anyone who has actually read the petition would know that it says nothing even close to that. Hell, the image of the petition in the video alone says that the only thing requested was for him to admit that he was wrong about the Mario is Mental theory, which is reasonable and understandable give how rarely he ever admits his mistakes. If you don't believe me, here's a link to the petition because unlike MatPat, I don't want people to blindly believe everything I say. This alone made think he's lying about everything else during this segment, especially since he didn't seem upset about the backlash at all during his Pope video, and it shows that he is perfectly willing to lie to his audience for sympathy, which is a very shitty thing to do. Second of all, yeah. How dare people call you out for making crappy content? They really are monsters. And throughout the whole video, MatPat made no attempt to distinguish legitimate criticism of his videos and personal attacks on him, which leads me to believe that he doesn't want to be criticized at all. Uh, you're on the Internet, buddy. Criticism is everywhere, especially for theories, which are supposed to be criticized by their very nature. Grow up and deal with it or get out. This portion of the detour also made me think that he wants his fans to think that any and all criticisms on his videos are attacks on him as a person, and that leads me to believe that he wants his fans to think that criticisms are personal attacks. I shouldn't have to explain how wrong this is, how toxic a mindset like that is, or how many problems it will create for everyone involved. Third of all, the sad music was very manipulative. No one should need emotionally manipulative music if what they are saying is sincere. Fourth of all, he clearly put effort into acting sad, almost as if he was faking it. In the twitter video where he debunked the rumor that he was deleting comments, he sounded genuinely upset. Comparing those two videos, I'm pretty sure he was faking his sadness in this one. And finally, this was released just before the absolutely abysmal For Honor video was uploaded, and my own theory is that he put the detour here in an (ultimately failed) attempt to avoid massive backlash for what he knew was an awful, awful video. Before this video, I just thought MatPat was a complete idiot, but now I see him for the lying Manipulative Bastard he truly is—a nice and charming bastard mind you, but a bastard nonetheless.
• Kirby...Dream Land's Biggest THREAT!
  • Tropers/Tailikku: I think the backlash that this episode got would be enough to prove a point about this being one of MatPat's biggest DMoSs, but there's definately good reasons why that would be the case: Matthew's original sin of cherry-picking information to outright demonize the Incorruptible Pure Pureness that is Kirby. To begin, there's the fact that Matthew likes to put the games out of order, stating that Squeek Squad occurs after Return to Dream Land and yet no evidence proves that to be the case. Next is the fact that the first three games he lists are either in regards to Poor Communication Kills, Dude, Where's My Reward?, or "Shoot First Ask Later". Much of Kirby's treatment of the enemy characters is being treated like a repeat of the earlier "Mario is Mental" videos, saying that Kirby has no remorse for eating his enemies or plowing through them. For that matter, it's clear that Matthew did not read the manual for Kirby's Adventure since it shows why Kirby had to fight off Dedede's henchmen and later fight Dedede: he was under the assumption of Dedede defiling sacred ground (read: the Fountain of Dreams). How was Kirby supposed to know that Dedede was actually sealing away Nightmare by breaking the Star Rod, at the cost of the Dream Landers not being able to get a good night's sleep? Simple: Kirby didn't trust Dedede since the last time they met, Dedede was stealing all the food from Dream Land. As the saying goes "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." And this was the "once". Meta Knight could have easily have clued Kirby in on the situation since he was dropping the candies in certain stages to give Kirby a boost, but he doesn't due to his last appearance having him vanish after his mask breaks. Speaking of the two rivals, Matthew does not even acknowledge them when Magolor tricks all three of them, plus Bandana Dee, in Return to Dream Land, instead placing the blame soley on Kirby for the deception, when all four of them are all equal in this. In addition, Kirby and crew don't even know if Landia is in fact sentient. For all they know, it just shot them out of the sky. Then with Squeek Squad, Matthew treats the entire game as if Kirby's making his way to Castle Dedede to get his strawberry shortcake back, brushing the chest off as if it's a sidequest. This shows that he didn't bother playing the game since both goals are one and the same, established at the end of the first world Prism Plains, which is also where Dedede is fought. Kirby doesn't see the chest as some trophy, he thinks that the chest is holding the cake, and he needs to fight the Squeeks to get it back. It's only at the end of Gamble Galaxy does he know what's going on with the chest, but Matthew still paints it as if he doesn't care for Popstar going to hell, only that he gets cake after defeating Dark Nebula. Then we get to the fact that he paints most of Super Star as if Kirby is making life hell on Popstar by having the Gourmet Race with Dedede, not caring for the wildlife because his nap was disturbed in Dynablade, acting as the Robbie Rotten to Meta Knight's Sportacus in the Revenge of Meta Knight, or some sort of alien invader who sets the galazy back a few centuries in Milky Way Wishes. To pick those apart one by one, the Dream Landers are taking an active part in Gourmet Race (they set the courses up, mark when to start and finish, and even applaud Kirby for winning or booing Dedede), Kirby was more concerned for the aggriculture and landscape in Dynablade to the point of looking after Dyna's chicks, leading to a "shared-back scratch" in the Revenge of Meta Knight, where Meta Knight had gone full Knight Templar against what he perceived as a lazy lifestyle (even with the infamous "Prepare to die!" quote. And as for MWW, Matthew seems to have had Skewed Priorities for what he did to Kirby, especially since it's the reason why Kirby did this in the first place: the Sun and Moon were fighting. Forget that little plot detail, we have a bias to put out there! If Kirby was an invader, then why is it that all the bosses (what he calls those stars' heroes) include the likes of Wham Bam Rock, Heavy Lobster, and Computer Virus? If anything those are more Weapons of Mass Destruction rather than heroes. And that brings us to NOVA, which Matthew claims would be benefitial for the Galaxy had it not been destroyed in the fight with Marx, ignoring the fact that we see another similar clock like it in Planet Robobot, Star Dream, and learn that these clocks can erase souls. If Matthew wants to pain Kirby as the Beerus of the series, then NOVA and Star Dream are the Broly and Cell of the series, and again as a reminder, the Sun and Moon were fighting. In fact, despite Matthew saying that Kirby ruined everything for the Galaxy, not even helping the Sun and Moon, as he puts it, he did in fact help the Galaxy for the better, by destroying an Artifact of Doom and having the Sun and Moon work together to stop NOVA. Then of course, there's the fact that Matthew brought up Avalanche by saying that we get to see Kirby's competitive edge in what he calls a "Candy Crush clone", ignoring the fact that it's a Dolled-Up Installment of Puyo Puyo. And then he goes and says that it's noncanon, bringing into question why he would want to bring up the game in the first place? At the end of the day, the whole video is another of his "X video game hero is actually a villain" set of videos, which he would try to continue in the never realized Part 2, tying it into Void Termina and the Dark Matter species, only to be torn apart by the whole Kirby fanbase. Because of that we had ourselves a moment of wasted potential, since his next video on Kirby (still failing in its logic and evidence) acknowledged the criticisms, only to go back into the same stuff that he did in the first place after this video.
  • Kirby 0189: Talking as someone who usually doesn't care about Game Theory but heard about this particular theory once the Kirby fandom mocked it to hell and back, aside from the obvious grasping at straws present in the video, the real DMoS to me is the end of the video hinting at a second part connecting Kirby to Void Termina. Back when Kirby Star Allies came out, the fight with Void Termina made the fandom go nuts because of its implications, having a god of destruction take on a form similar to Kirby and Dark Matter, suggesting Kirby has some rather dark origins related to both parties. A video about that is something I'd want to see... so why didn't he just make a single video focusing on that instead of making a bunch of BS first and expecting people to want to see what else he had to say after destroying his credibility? While he still wouldn't be able to convince people that Kirby is a villain, Void Termina's existence supplies actual meat to the theory that Kirby is of a dark origin and could have been really dangerous if his personality were any different, making the entire part 1 completely pointless. I appreciate that he acknowledged the criticisms towards the first video and held off on his planned part 2, but really I think that he should have just made that part 2 as a solo video to begin with and scrapped the nonsense video he was criticized for. You know, make a theory focusing on information that is actually there and something I could appreciate for effort instead of cherry-picking and making a fool of himself.

Game Lab

• "The Science of Sword Fighting!":
  • Albert 3105: You thought the research failures in Game Theories were too detracting? Wrong. In this video, it claims to explore realistic swordfighting scenarios, yet everything in the video quickly reveals itself to be stage Flynning. It goes downhill from there.

GT Live

• fluffything: For me, it was his FNAF-themed livestream. Why? Well, long story short, he makes it seem like Scott Cawthon himself was going to be a major guest in the stream. Heck, at the start, he even acts like Scott is actually going to answer questions in person alongside MatPat. Is it Scott? Nope! It's Alex, one of the guys that helps research the facts and lore of the FNAF series for the Game Theory videos. Heck, Scott doesn't even show up at all. We don't see him at any point, and we don't even get to hear his voice. In fact, the only "guest" appearance he makes is that he posts on Twitter during the livestream. In other words, it was nothing more than a tasteless attempt to get more viewers by essentially lying to everyone. It doesn't help that the description in the YouTube upload of the stream states "Special surprise guest Scott Cawthon!", further adding to the misinformation that Scott would be making an actual appearance on the stream. But, no. Instead, we get "Fake Scott" (AKA Alex) and the real Scott's only contribution to the stream are a bunch of Tweets posted during the whole thing. I'm sure I'm not the only one who sat through the whole thing hoping to see/hear Scott himself and end up sorely disappointed. Game Theory, next time you say you have Scott Cawthon (or any other gaming-based celebrity, for that matter) on your livestream, actually have him on the stream instead of wasting everyone's time with this bullshit you tried to pull on both your fans and FNAF fans as well.

Deadlocked

• Video about Dark Souls:
  • Rexis 12: Game Theory is a fine web show and all, and I don't usually blame it for some mishaps here and there. But what really made me grind my teeth here was the other side of the argument. Particularly the bearded asshole trying to call it the worst game ever. Now, Dark Souls isn't a perfect game, yes, it has it's flaws and screw-ups *glances at Bed of Chaos*, but the game itself is mostly fair and has a "let the player learn on its own" mentality, which works great by how the game plays. But then said bearded asshole decided to trash the game for his own failure. Case in point, the Pyromancer segment, where he complains that they didn't teach him about how pyromancy works and that the false information made him waste his levels on Intelligence. The stupid thing, it's clear that Pyromancy is a different class than Sorcery, the proof was in the character creation where Pyromancer and Sorcerer are two different things. Then there's also the pyromancey spells themselves, where if you actually paid attention to the game and looked at the spells like a normal person, you would have seen that Pyromancy has to requirements. The kicker, he calls this bad information, while it was his own ineptitude to the game. Another thing was how smug and pretentious he was whenever he tried to 'argue' about his points. Example, when Matt said he died from the Giant throwing firebomb, he called it a cheap death with a scoff, when it wasn't because it was their own fault for not killing the giant in the first place. Or how about that he seems to cling on one, ONE, mistake in the game that did nothing to impact gameplay besides just a little bit of health. Yet whenever he tries to argue, he brings that up, and nothing else. Newsflash, one mistake doesn't mean the entire game has the mistake. Another thing, blaming your own stupidity at a game and then blaming said game for the stupidity automatically loses you points in your 'argument'.
  • cricri3007: Strangely, this episode is also my DMoS but for entirely different reasons. I felt that the "bearded asshole" felt too much like a Strawman for me, he could have pointed other things about the game that aren't right. Like the fact that the story is so dark that even a black hole seems brighter, the fact that it contributes to the Casual-Competitive Conflict,... but no, nothing like that. Just him complaining about his own failures just so Matt could "win" the debate and to discredit those who says Dark Souls sucks.
• OVERWATCH vs TF2: Is Newer Always Better?
  • Butter: It was very hard to pick the worst moment of this video. Is it the part where MatPat acts like there are no teleporters or grappling hooks in Team Fortress 2? Is it the part where Todo uses random voice lines from the game without any context or reason? Is it the part where they claim that having memes and cosplay are what makes and breaks a community? No, those moments may be stupid, but nothing tops this moment: MatPat complained that all TF2 characters, except the Demoman and "maybe the pyro", are white males. This argument falls flat on so many levels. First, the argument "All X are Y, except [list of X that are not Y]" is self-defying, as it is literally true for literally any X or Y. Second, it is ridiculous to hold up character designs from 2007 to today's diversity-standards. Third, this complaint is extremely hypocritical and kind of ironic since 8 out of 9 people of the Deadlock cast are white males themselves, MatPat included.
    • supernintendo128: I agree, except that MatPat was flat-out wrong about the character roster consisting of mostly white males. Yes, the mercs are all white males (bar the Demoman and possibly the Pyro), but over half of them are actually from different ethnic origins (except the Scout, Soldier, and Engineer, who are all Americans, albeit from different regions of America). The Demoman is Scottish, the Heavy is Russian, the Medic is German, the Sniper is Australian actually a New Zealander, and the Spy is French. This is definitive proof that he did not play the game at all or even look into the supplementary material and instead browsed the TF2 Wiki for a few minutes before calling it a day. How lazy can MatPat possibly get to think that this level of research is passable?
  • dribbleondo: The worst moment for me in that whole video, in my eyes, is the fact that he tried to make out that TF2 was dying specifically because of Overwatch. Firstly, he showed the graph in such a manipulative way, in that he showed the dropoff for when Overwatch was released, then didn't show the numbers going back up to above-normal levels a few weeks later, making it look like TF2 had lost more players than it actually had done. This also wasn't specific to TF2, as Counter Strike, DOTA2, as well as much smaller games were affected by Overwatch's release. Then the nail in the coffin? He quickly switched to another subject to cover up the fact that he didn't give out Overwatch's graph for concurrent player numbers, as those graphs don't exist publically.
• Heat Edge Sword: For me, it would be "Pokemon: Which Gen 1 Starter is truly the best?". Pushing the terrible excuse of not including Bulbasaur in this Deadlock video aside, the video itself isn't really good. For one, they wasted their time comparing about how Fire and Water work in real life, and they act like as if that would add something to Charmander and Squirtle when they're better off just stating how their type would fare in the games. Secondly, I have no idea what they are referring to, as in, are they talking about how they perform in the Generation 1 games? Is it Generation 3 games, or is it from Generation 4 onwards? If it's Generation 1, then Charizard actually has 85 special stat rather than 109 special attack stat (special split doesn't occur until Gen 2). Then MatPat points out that Charmander learns Flamethrower at Level 38 (in the Gen 1 games), which is somewhat true, but he later said that Charizard learns Flamethrower at Level 42, which is actually the level that Charmeleon learns that move in Gen 1. As the video goes on, Austin makes a huge deal about how Charizard can fire off Hyper Beam as it has a high special attack stat (Hyper Beam is classified as Physical in Gen 1-3 and most fully evolved Pokemon can learn that move), and he considered that Charizard is better for defensive purpose when compared to Blastoise, just based on type resistances and immunity, when Charizard is more of an offensive Pokemon while Water-type is renowned for their defensive capability. Eh, I'm going to get a glass of water.

Film Theory

• Cat Muto: The 'Neville - The Chosen One?' video. It was such a stupid video and a complete waste of time for anyone to watch and for Mat to have created, to begin with. His entire spiel is about the amazing, incredible theory that Neville could be the Chosen One instead of Harry because he would fit the prophecy, too. Yes, thanks, Mat. That's basically what part of the entire The Lost Prophecy chapter in Order of the Phoenix was about. Talking about how the prophecy could have been referring to Harry (the half-blood) or Neville (a pureblood). He spent an entire almost-20-minutes-long video talking about what was in-canon. This isn't a Film Theory, Mat, this is blatant, simple canon. I don't recall that exact scene from the movie version, but if the movie decided to not make this clear, well, that's just a case of a bad adaptation.
• Sonicfan 001: One of the most inaccurate "theories" would be the Zootopia "theory". It feels like he didn't see the film. First of all, he says that "Police are quicker to pull their weapons on predators" when the only example you see of this is Judy pulling out the fox repellent when first seeing Nick, which is meant to show her prejudices, not society's as a whole. He also says that "Judy hypothesises that predators are more savage than prey", when what she is saying during the press conference is repeating the theory of a badger doctor, who was using all of the evidence she had to work out why the 13 predators were savage. He also compares night howlers and crack by them both being "synthesized from harmless plants", even though night howler plants are not harmless; Judy's uncle Terry ate one and went savage. In continuation from the previous point, he says the night howlers "grow wild on Judy's parents' carrot farm", but they don't. Stu says they keep the bugs off the farm. He also says "Nobody had any idea that they were key to some psychotropic drug until a fox tells them so", however, both Stu and Bonnie knew they turned animals savage, they just didn't know the term of "night howlers", which is what they were told. He also uses Nick's image while it was Gideon Grey who told them the name. Next, he says "Judy mistakes the bulbs for mouldy onions", but Chief Bogo is the one who says that they're onions, after which Judy responds with the scientific term Midnicampum holicithias. He also mentions Lionheart's line "the right thing for the wrong reason", which he quote mined to ignore that he wasn't talking about the Night Howler conspiracy, which is what MatPat makes it out to be, but about how he falsely imprisoned the savage predators. He also says "Mayor Lionheart is set up to make it look like he's behind the Night Howler scheme and sent to jail", yet again ignoring how he's imprisoned for his kidnappings and false imprisonments. Continuing his misunderstanding of anything to do with Lionheart, he says Lionheart "returns to power after his release", even though he is still clearly in his cell during the credits. He also states that the predators are "a thinly veiled allegory for African Americans", and he states it as a fact. One thing you notice when you watch the film is that none of the animal species lines up with any real world race group; a majority of the main cast experiences or subtly, or not, has prejudice. Stating that any species in the film lines up to a real world minority removes the entire point of the racism message, that it's about prejudice as a whole, not how much or little real world people suffer prejudices.
• Tropers/Negaman: The High School Musical theory would have to be one that counts as one for me. To start off, while it may have been a bit for comedy, the starting minutes permeat the rest of the episode with the idea that it's all just one giant envious diatribe against Zac Efron, or really anyone in a position like Troy or Gabriella's, rather than anything actually substantial or born of actual observation and analysis of the material. Especially on repeat viewings. Then comes his "observations" of the movies, trying to paint Sharpay's actions in HSM 1 as "beneficial" and "right" while disregarding the actual intent and purpose behind said actions. For example, trying to make her barbing at the beginning sound "reasonable" when he's clearly skirting around the fact that she's deliberately trying to discourage someone from trying out for the lead roles, which she highlights as something that she and her brother are possessive of. As well as ignoring how she deliberately signs her name in such a way that it takes up almost the entirety of the spot meant for lead auditions. He even spins the image upside down to show that same spot for crying out loud. Yet, he just says that no one signs up and disparaged the talent of those who do audition for the musical in general, as if that somehow paints Sharpay as "good" by any metric outside of a self-centered one. Another example is how he tries to paint her deliberate sabotage of Troy and Gabriella's callback as "testing their resolve" when it's very clearly to get the lead role secured for herself. Heck, he even fast forwards past the entire second movie, the one that shows her at her absolute worst, and paints the ending as a tragedy for her! Yes, he does go over the second movie in the video, but he blatantly glosses over so much of the intent, manipulation, and abuse of status and power that she displays just to portray her as the good guy and Troy as the bad guy. I could have liked the episode if the end point was that the Wildcats were the actual villains with Troy and Sharpay as their heroic/anti-heroic victims respectively. Because that would actually be something someone can come up with from watching the series. But, no, he completely glosses over & ignores the clear unhappiness Troy has with his status as The Ace and the expectations thereof, the genuine mutual love and connection between Troy and Gabriella (especially in HSM 3), and the arguable underlying narrative of how popularity and being the pinnacle of something are not worth it if they drive you to inhumanity. As well as the complete uncomfortability of Troy around Sharpay in HSM 2 in its entirety, her overt and clearly unwanted advances on him in said film, how Sharpay was the one making Mr. Fulton be so strict with the Wildcats and Troy, how she does want everything she desires due to her spoiled nature (the song outright highlighting this being seen as one of the best songs in the series and used as her theme in HSM 3 to boot), as well as her clear use of what he wants as a means to lead him like a dog on a leash and Corrupt the Cutie. TL;DR: What makes this episode a Dethroning Moment of Suck for me is the fact that he focuses only on the surface layer aspects like "what" is going on rather than the "why" of it all - making up his own reasons or just not giving a reason other than cherry-picked nonsense, using cherry-picked moments to paint Troy as greedy, spoiled, and ungrateful when the very movie he primarily does this with shows the very character he's propping up as a hero being exactly all of that and more, all the while ignoring anything resembling the actual depth of the characters or content of the series. The entire episode feels like what the starting minutes were: an unfunny jealous diatribe that tries too hard and long with what little circumstantial and incompatible material it has.

---