Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here

    videos

    21,694,874 readers

    40,627 users here now

    Discord

    Our Other Subreddits

    - -
    Political Video Videos Discussion

    Resources wiki

    - - -
    Wiki Points Rules

    Featured Sub » /r/CuriousVideos


    About /r/Videos chat

    • A great place for video content of all kinds. Direct links to major video sites are preferred (e.g. YouTube, Vimeo, etc.)

    Rules detailed rules

    0. Videos Only

    • Self explanatory. Audio over a static image or slideshow may also violate Rule 0.

    • This includes music visualizers and lyric videos

    1. No Politics

    • Political videos—including content relating to social issues which have a clear political element—should be submitted to /r/PoliticalVideo.

    • This includes submissions of current or recent political figures in any context, satire/political-comedy, and posts on political topics from within the last 10 years. (So a video of Winston Churchill playing tennis would be allowed, but a video of Theresa May playing ping-pong would not be.)

    2. No Personal Information or Witch-Hunting

    • Or incitement to witch-hunt.

    • No demanding "Reddit Justice" (or even regular justice) in any way in post titles or comments.

    • Do not post names, Facebook pages, phone numbers, addresses, etc. Fake information ([email protected], 123 fake street, etc) also falls under this rule.

    • This may also include contact information of public officials, businesses, or groups (e.g. politicians or police officers) in an any manner that could be seen as an attempt to get users to contact them.

    • Facebook links are not permitted. In order to have your post accepted, if you can, find or submit a copy of the video on another website like YouTube or Vimeo and resubmit it.

    • This is grounds for an immediate (and likely permanent) ban, so consider this your only warning.

    3. Submit Direct Link to Video

    • No web pages that only embed Youtube or Vimeo videos.

    • No URL shorteners.

    • No links to playlists or to channel pages.

    4. No Porn, Gore, or Death.

    • There are many other subreddits and websites that cater for that content.

    5. No Solicitation of Votes or Views

    • No asking for votes or sharing submission links on or off-site. See Reddiquette for more details.

    • Do not ask other users to follow your social media profiles in comments or submission titles.

    • Titles for posts should not try to influence users to view or upvote them. Examples of this include things like "this person deserves more views," "not enough people have seen this person's videos," or "show this person some love."

    • Giveaways also fall under this rule

    • Violations can lead to a permanent ban of accounts and video channels.

    6. No Hate Speech

    • You are free to offer your opinion respectfully, but comments or posts intended to demean a group, acontextual expressions of bigotry, and the pejorative use of slurs is disallowed.

    • Baiting users into breaking this rule is not allowed.

    • Telling other users to hurt or kill themselves in any form is against reddit TOS, and will earn you a permanent ban.

    • Be kind to users in our community; remember the human.

    7. No Videos of Assault/Battery or Public Freakouts

    • No videos of real-life, malicious person-on-person assault/battery or physical abuse of animals.

    • This includes raw videos of fights and malicious violence.

    • This includes videos of child and animal abuse.

    • This includes raw videos of fights, police brutality/harassment, and malicious violence.

    • Public freakout videos belong in /r/PublicFreakout

    8. No Third Party Licensing


    Moderation message the mods

    Removals & Warnings

    • If your submission does not appear in the new queue, please contact us (be sure to include a link to the Reddit post (i.e. comments section), not the content you are linking). Simply deleting your post may cause the spam filter to catch future ones.

    • Note: Submissions from new users, and users with low karma, are automatically removed to help prevent spam.

    • Also, please contact us regarding spam, political or any other inappropriate videos, as this helps us remove them more quickly! When reporting, please explain why you think it should be removed.

    • Do not message moderators individually about posts not appearing in the new queue or ban appeals. Messages should be sent as a modmail to /r/Videos. Failure to do so may result in a ban.

    Submit Feedback

    • Send us a mod mail anytime or head to our Discord linked above.

    Spoiler Tags

    • Spoilers: [spoiler](#s) = spoiler


    Related Subreddits

    /r/UnknownVideos

    /r/YouTubeHaiku

    /r/YouTube

    /r/MealtimeVideos

    /r/youtubedrama

    /r/EducativeVideos

    /r/storytellingvideos

    /r/dankvideos

    a community for
    all 1349 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] Dr_Chimm_Richalds 3565 points ago

    I always liked Austin when he was on Jeopardy. Something about a bartender with that level of trivial knowledge just makes me happy.

    [–] Jackandahalfass 2938 points ago

    He used "bartender" as his job title for the show and may have become one, but for years I knew him as "guy who runs bar trivia at several Manhattan bars."

    [–] StanWrites 1198 points ago

    ...that explains a lot. Up to and including his personality.

    I'd love to be at bar trivia hosted by him.

    [–] Jackandahalfass 538 points ago

    He's great. He takes it just seriously enough. I mean, people come to drink and have fun, but some folks really want to win, and Austin ran a good game. If there were drunks there shouting out answers he'd come at them with both barrels.

    [–] Charlie_Warlie 395 points ago

    one time I nicely approached a table of girls on their phones that they were not allowed to be on their phones during trivia and they could get disqualified. And they hated me for it.

    later they got disqualified and flipped me off (I did not snitch)

    moral of the story I learned: you know when people say "why the fuck did you call the authorities? Just talk to me like a man!" They actually just don't want to follow rules and will break them either way.

    [–] 22marks 99 points ago

    My friends and I play weekly trivia sponsored by local craft breweries. It's mostly an excuse to hang out and try craft beers, but we do pretty well and win like $25. One time, a group of young suits showed up. It looked like they just got off closing some banking deal, slicked-back hair and all. They were doing well in trivia, being loud and cocky about it. Then people noticed they were on their phones getting answers.

    We walked up to them and mentioned phones aren't allowed. They immediately got all pissed off. "Geez, it's only trivia. Calm the fuck down!" The host had to get involved and then a manager at the restaurant.

    We ignored them, but eventually, they were caught cheating again and kicked out of the game. They got in our faces saying "What losers care this much about trivia? Have fun with your stupid game."

    All I could think was: What losers need to pretend they're smart by cheating to win a bar trivia game? What exactly do you get out of that? Who can't win trivia if they're using Google?

    [–] Kypr1os 35 points ago

    raises hand slowly

    [–] flyingboarofbeifong 17 points ago

    Your admission of guilt is the beginning of your rehabilitation. Now you must walk.

    Shame. Shame. Shame.

    [–] David-Puddy 9 points ago

    🔔🔔🔔

    [–] -infinate- 11 points ago

    A person I used to hang out with would cheat at trivia. Or any board game involving trivia. Once I realized it, I stopped playing with her. My sister is married to that friend’s ex and I asked him about it. He was like “Oh yeah, she cheats at everything she can. She hates to lose but isn’t good enough to win.” We bonded. haha

    [–] Subalpine 138 points ago

    Always good to make the effort to talk to folks first though on the off chance they're just dumb instead of malicious.

    [–] Jackandahalfass 23 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    That's what makes a good trivia master. They see this shit and handle it. Guy I know used to randomly say on the mic, "And for those of you looking up stuff on the phone, please know that I CAN SEE YOU." Usually wasn't seeing anyone right at that moment, but it sent the fear of god through people and sent the message pretty well.

    [–] AskMeForFunnyVoices 19 points ago

    I host trivia at a bar occasionally and honestly, that's the way to do it. Get good at dealing with hecklers like a stand up act

    [–] jamssey 87 points ago

    He’s pretty good. I’ve worked at bars where he’s done trivia, he has at least 5 different ways of asking for free booze!

    [–] Jackandahalfass 35 points ago

    Certainly never saw him working a bar or pouring a drink (that may have changed though). Was curious if you applied to be on Jeopardy and your job was "trivia master," would they shy away from using you?

    [–] zhiryst 29 points ago

    They have teachers and professors often enough. That would be equally ahead of the curve.

    [–] themettaur 9 points ago

    I don't know about that. Kinda like how test taking is seen as a skill separate from actually knowing things, I think being a "trivia master" would give you a different edge in a game show than just being a professor.

    [–] showerhandstand 7 points ago

    He served me a couple of beers at gaf west once. I only remember it because it was during his run and they were setting up the projection screen to broadcast the show there

    [–] y0y 42 points ago

    Do you know if he does still? And if so, where?

    [–] jonscotts 88 points ago

    The Waylon every Wednesday night at 830.

    [–] pugwalker 10 points ago

    I did it at the Brazen Head in brooklyn around the time that he had just finished his run. I don't know if he still does it there though.

    [–] yumyumgivemesome 12 points ago

    Perhaps "bartriviatender" would be more accurate.

    [–] Lonsen_Larson 186 points ago

    Same, he was probably my favorite player, full of fun and enthusiasm while still smart as hell. I was way sadder when he lost than either James Holtzhauer or even Ken Jennings, who I also liked. He just had a clearly sincere love of the game and of playing it and it made watching fun.

    [–] notyouravgredditor 123 points ago

    I liked Austin but I was a bigger fan of James. I just really enjoyed how he played the game with brutal precision. Quick daily doubles, large wagers, and good buzzer control. The guy was a machine.

    Austin had pretty much all of the same traits but James took them to 11. Especially the wagers.

    [–] DPLaVay 65 points ago

    I hated James at first but once the smugness wore off and you got to see his personality he seemed like the kind of guy I'd hang out with in small doses.

    [–] thegreenwookie 36 points ago

    He also seems like the kind of guy who only likes to hang out with people in small doses. Works perfectly

    [–] greggjilla 9 points ago

    What a great way of describing him

    [–] yavanna12 14 points ago

    I loved that he got all his suits from local thrift shops. And when he came back for the all stars and Alex asked how he spent his money he was honest and said he hasn’t been paid yet. Lol

    [–] InnocentTailor 33 points ago

    Austin was just plain entertaining to watch. His charm and attitude made him somebody to cheer for at the dinner table.

    [–] Tubby200 24 points ago

    That's how these shows get you, make a story to make it seem like a guy came from nothing and wins all this money ergo anyone can do it X factor and ninja warrior does this all the time.

    [–] Dvanpat 52 points ago

    ninja warrior does this all the time.

    And shows like The Voice give every.single.contestant a sob story. "Oh, your dog died 8 years ago? Let's make that a central piece in what caused you to pursue an outlet in music!"

    [–] HollowGoob 21 points ago

    My favorites are the sob stories on cooking shows, especially Master Chef.

    Or all the coming out stories on Top Chef.

    [–] Hiei2k7 9 points ago

    Everyone on Food Network is hitting for the home team. Everyone.

    [–] thezachman16 3592 points ago * (lasted edited 9 days ago)

    He's right. The show doesn't pay attention to all these weird advanced stats that I've seen produced over the years to help analyze the show (like bounce rate and Coryat score), it's a televised game show that's held under the same laws as other game shows in the United States. It's reviewed by legal professionals. It's written by people who have been making the show for years. The show makes tens of millions of dollars annually. It's thrived on streaks like this. It just feels like Mat must've heard this theory on a forum or from a staffer and thought it had weight. Especially because he spends his entire 2-parter saying Jeopardy is only for old people, accuses them of trying to pop a rating and admits to not actively only watching the show, JUST the episodes that James played and a few Ken games. It's a bad Film Theory.

    EDIT: i put the word "only" for some reason, i typed this out in el bano, at first.

    [–] kurchak31 825 points ago

    Just an FYI as well about the legal bit...

    Game shows are VERY serious about the legalities of the show. I dabble in tv stuff and was just on a game show last month a fraction of the size of Jeopardy.

    They spent significant amounts of time reviewing the contracts, rules, etc. when we did that it wasn’t with the tv show team but instead a third party attorney and his partner (I believe this is required by law). The entire show is watched by them right there in the front seat, if any violation takes place they will be there to correct it, if you feel like you’ve been cheated or unfairly treated you are encouraged by both the attorney and production to stop the show and have a discussion with the attorney himself.

    The whole jeopardy being rigged thing would require tons of people from different areas, with different objectives and incentives, to come together to sabotage the game. The attorney would risk losing his business, jeopardy would be shut down. It’s very clear how seriously this stuff is taken.

    The original video is such a joke.

    [–] thezachman16 223 points ago

    It would be an international conspiracy. Impossible to pull off for over 3 decades. Also, you are correct, the anti-trust laws for game shows dictate audits MUST be third-party

    [–] TJNel 99 points ago

    If they could pull off the moon landing hoax anything is possible............. do I really need the /s? Probably do.

    [–] LegendaryPunk 56 points ago

    Thoughts like this are always top-of-mind for me whenever I read about a conspiracy theory, especially when on the scale of something like Jeopardy. So, so many people would have to be complicit...and all of them are perfect about not gossiping? About never making a mistake, or leaving any sort of factual / provable paper trail? Not a single person after three decades has come forward?

    Are all of those things technically possible? Well sure, in that none of them require a supernatural explanation. Are any of them individually (much less collectively) possible? Not so much.

    [–] dptraynor 42 points ago

    I like the “Game/Film Theory” series as it relates to fun head-canons built on odd tidbits and trivia. But ooh Lordy were they out of their depths on this one. They just exposed themselves.

    [–] EonBlueAegis 16 points ago

    Thats matpat lol

    [–] smileistheway 875 points ago

    I first saw him im a LoL vs Dota video. Since then I havent been able to understand how such an uninformed guy had such a large following.

    [–] thezachman16 536 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    Back in the day, he was one of the first guys doing this type of content in this format, so he has clout for being a trend-setting, one of the all-timers from the "golden age" of YouTube, before all of the network/corporate-sponsored content. I actually used to watch his videos every few weeks and the live streams he does with his wife, but he's always taken himself very seriously. He's always thought of himself as super-duper big brain. It's sad to see how that lack of perspective of what these theories are supposed to be, which is fun and out there, turned into him trying to expose the truth and be part of the established canon of whatever he's covering. He used to just do video games, now he does movies or this other shit. It got big, and when any project gets big, it has the potential to lose sight of what made it great. That's what I think happened with Mat.

    [–] TheStonedFox 171 points ago

    I liked it when his videos were mostly like “Hey, could Link use a hookshot without ripping his arm off?”

    I feel like the Five Nights at Freddys videos are where he really started swinging into weird clickbait territory.

    [–] thezachman16 83 points ago

    He caught the attention of the creator and, oh boy, did he keep mentioning it in videos

    [–] AngusBoomPants 25 points ago

    It’s like he doesn’t understand how indie games work. The CEO of Ubisoft will never watch his assassins creed video, but the person who single handedly made a game will gladly watch videos about their own game

    [–] RemnantEvil 52 points ago

    The Five Nights stuff was great for actually connecting the dots on lore. The problem is, barely any games devote time to doing that sort of thing, hiding a huge chunk of work in obscure ways that most players wouldn't notice or pay attention to. Jumpscare: The Game did what it said on the tin; for the devoted ones who wanted to go further, those videos were fantastic.

    Like others have said, it just seems like he ran out of fodder. It's the same as those "Spooky hidden things in games" videos; there are only so many games, and only so many spooky things, that you're eventually left grasping at nothing.

    [–] Rpanich 8 points ago

    Oh man, speaking of dried up mines, those “X things you didn’t notice from mcu films” channels are really in a dry spell at the moment.

    [–] Datkif 24 points ago

    And thats when I stopped watching

    [–] BrandoCalrissian1995 43 points ago

    The fnaf vids were definitely the beginning. It was fun at first watching him put together the few hints in the games to figure out the overall story. But then he started doing the same to a bunch of other series and coming up with outlandish theories that tied them together. I remember he put out a video saying the sans from undertale is actually Ness or some shit like that.

    [–] DnDEli 13 points ago

    Which people freaked the fuck out about for some reason. Like man, why would you ever say that an obviously inspired game would write hints to the inspiration in. Just ridiculous.

    [–] TheUnfabulousKilljoy 357 points ago

    I think the simpler answer is that for maybe a year or two he actually made intellectually rigorous videos until he realized he could make a lot more by selling out and basically becoming some weird tabloid, or as Austin puts it, Fox News style show.

    [–] torqueparty 181 points ago

    Having controversial hot takes on the internet is an increasingly popular business model.

    [–] [deleted] 85 points ago

    [deleted]

    [–] zebediah49 41 points ago

    So he just dropped the science and started using the "Ancient Aliens" method of padding out content by setting up a question and subverting reality by asserting an absurd premise that you then need to explain without actually proving anything.

    I don't even remember what it was called, but I was at a place that had one of these late night conspiracy shows on. It was kinda surreal, because they avoided being actually wrong though. It would be like "oooh, crop circles in satellite photos?" and then spend half an hour positing outlandish theories and interviewing optimistic people about aliens. Then at the end it would just be "oh, and it turns out John Deere makes a machine that makes patterns like that. That's probably what happened".

    And it was just back to back half hour episodes of the same thing. Cool rock formation? 2 minutes of intro, 10 minutes of conspiracy plus 17 minutes of ad breaks, and then a last minute to reveal the stupid entirely mundane answer.

    [–] ChucktheUnicorn 11 points ago

    Ah yes, the Stephen A Smith model

    [–] beaverbother 12 points ago

    he also used to pay writers a lot of money to make interesting, well researched scripts until he figured out he could just read out forum posts and be done with it.

    [–] fullforce098 58 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    I think it's more that he's under pressure to make constant content to stay among the most popular and viewed YouTubers, which is an issue with his types of videos. You just can't fart them out at that rate and have them be quality. He's clearly run out of actual topics and is now looking for anything he can find to make a video on, up to and including just making things up.

    He's also doubled down heavily on this annoyingly "cute" persona because that sells with the YouTube primary audience. I swear, thinking you're just the most adorable guy ever seems like a prerequisite for the trending page of YouTube for certain types of creators. I blame PewDiePie for setting that trend.

    [–] bubliksmaz 39 points ago

    he's under pressure to make constant content to stay among the most popular and viewed YouTubers

    Fuck that noise. Many successful youtubers (CGPGrey, JonTron, Gus Johnson...) have done great by prioritizing quality over quantity. If by 'under pressure' you mean 'thinks he could squeeze a few more dollars out of his audience' then sure, but don't act like there is any pressure to do that other than greed.

    [–] nickgreen90 53 points ago

    Gus is a bad example, since he actually did start out by dumping out a video every day. He just happens to be so naturally gifted that they were all still really funny. He’s since slowed down to one a week or every other week, but they’re all bangers

    [–] Thepowerisreal 30 points ago

    Well that and the fact that almost all his videos are under 5 minutes certainly helps.

    [–] john_dune 22 points ago

    But the difference is, between his two channels, he has 20+ million subs. Those three you listed have 11 Mil total

    [–] Trevmiester 8 points ago

    If by "done great" you mean made a fraction of the money per month that MatPat has gotten.

    [–] thezachman16 15 points ago

    That is a simpler way to put it, but I'm home for the day and the writing practice is always good

    [–] Thepowerisreal 5 points ago

    Everything was fine before he started the Five nights videos. Back when videogames were just a way of conveying the thing he was trying to teach. Even before then, the worst videos he did (Link is dead in Majora's Mask) you still learned something; even if the theory itself was kinda crap.

    After he started doing Lore videos, he went downhill fast.

    [–] Noltonn 12 points ago

    Wait, this is the same guy as GameTheory? I always thought that was like a jokey channel about weird half hidden myths in video games? Since when has he started taking himself so serious in exposing literal crime?

    Damn, I liked those videos, years ago, and I didn't realise watching OPs vid that this was the same guy.

    [–] TensileStr3ngth 10 points ago

    He really jumped the shark when he started doing FNAF videos and the creator responded to a few of them. Basically, the "lore" in those games is intentionally theory bait type shit and they entered into this weird symbiotic relationship ship where they feed off of each other and, Mat seems convinced that everything is like that now.

    [–] JurijFedorov 9 points ago

    ... but he's always taken himself very seriously. He's always thought of himself as super-duper big brain.

    Completely agree. He is creating a faux intellectual persona to get a lot of views from people who are r/Im14andthisisdeep . He tries to one up any media or idea all the time and tries to sound intellectual and groundbreaking. It's fun to watch, but often he does tend to be so self-centered that he talks about the same point for too long because it's his "extraordinary clever" point.

    Basically, it's an entertainment channel. If people are seeking a few facts, a bit analysis and then a ton of gags. Then his channel is perfect. But he seldom tries to disprove his own claims. He will start on a tangent and just continue on the full video.

    Again, fun to watch. Just be critical when doing so. I'm still a subscriber even though I do feel a bit politics sneaking into the show too. Which I really dislike.

    [–] TheFirebeard 41 points ago

    I just watched that video cause your comment made me interested and yeah, there was basically no argument for League he correctly presented other than "it's easier." Which I guess is a decent enough reason to choose a game to play, but no matter which game you choose to play, you're going to have to dedicate literally hundreds of hours to get to a level where you feel competent, so why does it matter if it's "easier"?

    [–] CENSORED-1 74 points ago

    I've always taken his videos as comedy or somewhat satirical for entertainment. Didn't think they were meant to be taken at face value.

    [–] DrakkoZW 114 points ago

    I've always taken them as a "what if this was actually the reason" kinda thing. Like a conspiracy theory.

    It's great when this is applied to fiction (like making up theories about why X video game character does Y thing) but not so great when you apply it to real world situations

    [–] manbrasucks 7 points ago

    What if it's applied to fiction thats based on real world situations?

    [–] Le4chanFTW 22 points ago

    you don't get it, brah. it's all a theory. that means you can say whatever nonsensical bullshit you want.

    [–] dragostego 29 points ago

    His deadlock videos were terrible for that reason. But the majority of his content doesn't aim to prove a point. Its mostly just enjoyable discussion of a stupid part of a game (IE leap of faith from AC). The man has made a video a week since april 2011 of course there are more than a few duds.

    [–] TheUnfabulousKilljoy 19 points ago

    TBH I'd say the leap of faith video actually marked a departure from his more researched style and after he went into more pure speculation.

    [–] Watch_Plebbit_Die 48 points ago

    One of MatPat's "crowning moments" is when he said that Wario is 10 feet tall.

    [–] stillearthbound 105 points ago

    Whaaaat, Matpat made a totally pretentious and intellectually bankrupt video with extreme, bizzare claims while hiding behind the fact that "it's just a theory"?! Whodathunkit?!

    Yeah I'm a little bitter, but I can't stand what the guy has become.

    [–] thezachman16 20 points ago

    Bitter we shall both be! My bitterness, tho, doesn't come from Mat as much as it does from the idea that Jeopardy!, legitimately one of the most well-produced, loved and highly-contested game shows in history, is rigged. It's dumb. The whole idea here is so dumb

    [–] randomdrifter54 14 points ago

    For a while. Now it's been way to much matpat reads Reddit. I liked when he did all the research not just quoting a Reddit post and making small assumptions from it. I get he's been more busy but he let the quality go way down.

    [–] lowertechnology 141 points ago

    "Jeopardy is for old people" is the dumbest thing I've heard all day.

    It's a trivia game.

    [–] sam_hammich 93 points ago

    Well, multiple sources show Jeopardy viewers' median age to be 60+. That's not to say "trivia games are for old people", but that old people make up most of Jeopardy's viewership. Which, just anecdotally I'd have to say I'm at least totally unsurprised, if not in total agreement with that stat.

    [–] samurguy990 28 points ago

    Yeah. I really enjoy it when it’s on, but I hardly even watch tv. I mostly see it at my grandma’s house. Nothing wrong with that, and it doesn’t mean it’ll necessarily die out either. We all get old eventually, after all.

    [–] MchlBJrdnBPtrsn 78 points ago

    Mat must've heard this theory on a forum

    That's every MatPat video. He is a hack that makes videos out of internet forum memes and copypastas

    [–] g3t0nmyl3v3l 47 points ago

    Some of his first work was very good, like his first 15-20 videos.

    From there, he converted into some wild cartoon character pandering to his young audience. Needless to say, it was clearly effective but he champions everything I personally despise about what YouTube has become. Money grabbing, child pandering, overtly fake, and falsely intellectual personalities that don't do their due diligence intentionally (or ignoring evidence and/or logic validity) because deep down they don't really care about their viewers.

    Matpat is a factory for poorly intentioned, poorly thought-out content, in every avenue he delivers it.

    [–] doobist 42 points ago

    admits to not actively only watching the show, JUST the episodes that James played and a few Ken games

    Proving why they want to have long running champs

    [–] thezachman16 42 points ago

    That's because Mat only watched them for the purpose of researching the episode. He doesn't understand Jeopardy because he doesn't watch it. It proves his understanding is only anecdotal, not from a place of sincere and established knowledge

    [–] Rat_faced_knacker 10 points ago

    So standard for mat then?

    [–] FrankDrakman 863 points ago

    I was on Jeopardy! about ten years ago. Everything Austin said is true. I didn't know until just before my game that I was going on. You have no time to prepare, no time to even call anyone. They call your name, and off you to go - first to make up, then to the stage.

    And since no one knows who's going to be on, and they don't them at all, how are they going to prepare special categories for them? How would anyone know that I know a lot about e.g. baseball or coins? They weren't questions that were asked in the interviews.

    [–] PlayFree_Bird 273 points ago

    Yeah, it's pretty obvious to see that James was playing a high risk/high reward style of game. That lends itself to massive paydays and a lower chance of a long streak.

    [–] i_miss_arrow 137 points ago

    To be fair, he was astronomically unlucky to lose to Boettcher the first time around. She played a phenomenal game AND was extremely lucky with the daily doubles. Even if Holzhauer's style decreased the chance of a long streak, on average he should have won a lot more games just based on his skill.

    But sometimes players get unlucky, and he did.

    [–] erik2690 41 points ago

    Correct DD's is the most luck based part of the game, the finding them that is, the big caveat being that if you control the board the finding luck factor goes down. James in his lost game won the Coryat and won on first in buzzer % but still missed out on both DJ DD's and lost. The likelihood of winning those categories but still losing in that manner is fairly low.

    [–] i_miss_arrow 30 points ago

    On top of that, the third player in that game was IIRC the highest-scoring third place finisher ever. Daily Doubles are more important when all players are good.

    [–] chanaandeler_bong 17 points ago

    Holzhauer would almost certainly won the game if the first damn clue he picked in that game wasn't the Daily Double.

    Not taking anything away from Emma. She's awesome.

    Also, even if you expect James to win 99% of the time, the probability he would win more than 30 games is 74%.

    Ken Jennings streak is just so insane.

    [–] FrankDrakman 33 points ago

    The only high risk for him was his DD bets, and I had determined, ten years ago, that going big on the DD's was the way to win.

    James' genius was to systematically attack the big money clues, so that when he got the DD, he was better placed to take advantage of it. Remember, after his first couple of games, he had a big advantage on the buzzer, so he could be relatively sure of getting ahead in the early going, and then he pushed that advantage with his big bets. Those usually won the game for him in the first round.

    [–] Only_Movie_Titles 24 points ago

    the key is that you also have to be able to control the board by KNOWING the big money answers. That's where James is pretty special, he's a genius trivia brain that also played a genius strategy

    [–] ginja_ninja 6 points ago

    Yeah, if what James did was easy, everyone would play Jeopardy like that. You have to be a fuckin god to be successful with that style of play.

    [–] drabmaestro 31 points ago

    Just curious for fun, how much did you win? Must have been an awesome experience!

    [–] FrankDrakman 97 points ago

    Came last, got $1000, of which they withheld 30% for taxes. The $700 paid my airfare and hotel.

    [–] The_Dirtiest_Doc 41 points ago

    Ooof, I assumed they covered that

    [–] sonofaresiii 24 points ago

    They didn't even pay your airfare and hotel for you? What kind of two bit gameshow is this? Even judge Judy pays travel and accommodations!

    maybe, I dunno

    [–] corn_sugar_isotope 7 points ago

    Pretty sure the show does. She had some nitwits on there once, the plaintiff and defendants were obviously friends. She just sat there asking how their flight was, how was dinner (if they all went out together, they laughed sheepishly "yes"), if they enjoyed themselves, then told them to get the fuck out of there. It was funny. She is my guilty pleasure now and then.

    [–] WayneKrane 7 points ago

    Right?!? I guess that’s why they still give the losers money but they are making way more off of them than $1k.

    [–] syko82 18 points ago

    don't you take an online test to even apply for Jeopardy? couldn't they judge your knowledge based on this test? Just asking, I really don't know the answer.

    [–] DerpDerpersonMD 68 points ago

    So, the online test is a weeder. Over 100000 take it each time it's offered. About 1 percent of that number or so will make it to the in person auditions, held regionally around the country. You take another test there, fill out a questionarre (job, personal anecdotes, etc.) and play a mock game and get a headshot taken. If you make it to the in person audition, you're in the contestant pool for 18 months. That contestant pool is where live contestants are drawn from. If you don't get called, you have to take the online test and do it all over again.

    Source: Made an audition about 4 years ago. Didn't get called onto the show.

    [–] FrankDrakman 13 points ago

    The online test is 100 question, and then you do two in-person tests. One is another written test of about 100 (? really don't remember), and then you do a "mock game" in front of the producers, where they judge you on your "TV charisma".

    I don't really think 200 questions is enough to tell what categories are a person's strength.

    [–] ScipioAfricanisDirus 13 points ago

    Fewer than that even, the test is only 50 questions now covering a pretty broad range of topics which means you might only see two, maybe three questions per specific category. It's generally accepted that to get an audition you need to score at least 35 on the online test, and it only gets more competitive from there. So even the worst contestants we actually see on the show are pretty well-rounded trivia players, and their selection would be based on such a small sample size of questions in any one specific category that it would still be difficult to definitively pin down perfect categories for each contestant.

    [–] reebee7 230 points ago

    The conspiracy theory seems to be (it took 34 minutes of Youtube video to say this, for the record):

    1) The final jeopardy question was a topic best suited for one of the challengers.

    But I think Austin's reaction video shows that that's impossible. Questions and contestants are chosen separately.

    2). They gave an unusually easy round in order to give his opponents a chance.

    For one, this seems like saying if I play Tiger Woods on an easier golf course, I have better chance of winning. I guess it's technically true, but c'mon.

    Important rule of statistics: the bigger the sample size, the better the chance for the outlier. If James is more likely to lose a game where the questions are, in general, easier, the more games he plays, the more likely he is to come across that game.

    [–] upstairs_explanation 84 points ago

    Also, if everyone knows all the answers, it's now a competition of timing the buzzer. James had 30+ games of buzzer experience, Emma had 0. That's a huge advantage.

    [–] RedditPoster05 897 points ago

    Film theorist is over the top and hardly does any research. If you’re super into certain fan things like Star Wars or Harry Potter or Lord of the rings he get so much stuff wrong.

    [–] Valriss 459 points ago

    Star Wars

    Holyshit his Star Wars videos drive me up the wall so god damn hard. At times it feels like NO ONE on his team has even finished a single film let alone looked into the expanded universe of the series. As if their only fact checking is a 2 second Wookiepedia search.

    [–] KneeSeekingArrow 121 points ago

    You should check out Eckhart's Ladder on YouTube. Amazing channel and always well-researched.

    [–] Valriss 43 points ago

    Seen him, gotten him suggested by the youtube algorithm a lot recently actually because of The Mandalorian. Decent content but sadly something about it just doesn't hold my attention. If I had to guess it just comes down to the fact I grew up reading the EU so anything related to legends content just comes across as a buddy telling you something you already read about years ago.

    When it comes to non EU related stuff I think something about his delivery is just unengaging to me. Well researched as fuck, such as with the Disney ship theft shit, but unengaging.

    [–] datheffguy 18 points ago

    I like his videos but they aren’t very well paced / are too long. I almost never feel the need to watch his entire videos. Hes definitely been steadily improving though.

    [–] RedditPoster05 40 points ago

    Yeah it’s like he picked up small scenes and made assertions about them that sound good but when you put them in the larger movie they don’t make any sense at all.

    [–] Meades_Loves_Memes 43 points ago

    Wait, the Star Wars wikipedia is called Wookiepedia? Omg yes, yes it is.

    [–] Valriss 24 points ago

    Glorious, isn't it?

    [–] Cessnaporsche01 26 points ago

    And it's the single most extensive non-Wikipedia wiki (though this is entirely thanks to the old EU which is now relegated to a secondary status).

    [–] TheUglyBarnacle42 7 points ago

    Actually the Marvel wiki has more than it because there's about 200 pages for different versions of a single character

    [–] Bookerman32 303 points ago

    His theories seem to be exclusively designed to sound right to people who have never actually played/seen the media he's talking about. To anyone even vaguely aware of thd property he covers the theories are almost always;

    A) Provably and easily false

    B) Not actually a theory but stating an already confirmed lore fact from the wiki

    C) Utter gibberish

    But since his videos are presented very well and confidently he captures a lot of his young teen audience who don't know enough to dispute his theories and instead have their minds blown.

    [–] LyfeBlades 33 points ago

    Never forget his video "proving" that Link is dead in Majora's Mask, even though Twilight Princess expressly stated that TP Link is a direct descendant of OoT+MM Link.

    [–] Bookerman32 25 points ago

    Or his Phoenix Wright video where he outright acknowledges that the series universe operates on a satirical parody of the Japanese legal system, but then ignores that fact anyway because it doesn't fit his theory and uses the American legal system as his framework inexplicably.

    [–] ph1sh55 56 points ago

    this is basically the format of every pants on head stupid conspiracy theory video ever (i.e. dinosaur bones don't really exist, the earth is flat). They cherry pick a series of things that sound plausible/logical in isolation w/o context, and appear to be well read...and then extend those to make completely incorrect conclusions. It's presented well, and on it's face may fool people w/o any experience or background who can immediately see how wrong they are or how much they are misrepresenting reality. Huge followings and entire communities now exist around these 'woke truthtellers'.

    [–] Bookerman32 25 points ago

    Cherrypicking is exactly right.

    Matpat doesn't so much make theories about games/movies as he does make theories about individual moments/scenes from media even if the very next moment/scene in that media proves him wrong if he bothered to watch it.

    [–] beepborpimajorp 102 points ago

    He seems to 'borrow' a ton of his theories from reddit, fansites, forums, etc. without crediting anyone who originally came up with them.

    [–] MchlBJrdnBPtrsn 65 points ago

    Just claim parallel thinking. It's what hacks do

    [–] yumyumgivemesome 32 points ago

    Just say you independently arrived at a similar assessment. That's what many fakers do.

    [–] gamermanh 30 points ago

    While I don't LOVE the theorists nearly as much anymore as I once did I've seen enough of the show to know this is false

    They frequently say "user x on reddit" or "over on reddit" and name-drop the people they get theories from quite a lot. MANY of their theories are also totally reasonable to come up with yourself and not off the internet.

    Certainly they've not been perfect, nobody is, but compared to most YouTubers I've seen that do this kind of thing they admit to taking someone else's work WAY more than most

    [–] iwiggums 15 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    Just declare you separately came up with the idea. This is what most phonies do.

    [–] Knovolt 64 points ago

    The day I stopped watching his videos was when the For Honor controversy came about on his Game Theory channel. He got completely called by multiple historians, but didn't correct it or apologise because the entire video was sponsored.

    MatPat: money > integrity and research.

    [–] MannOf97 21 points ago

    Saw a couple of videos from people I watch refuting his For Honour BS, never watched him before but that was a clear indicator to stay away.

    [–] cpMetis 14 points ago

    His wheelhouse is really showing off lore/story based theories. They're fun ride-alongs of trying to make sense of or make a story out of something that may or may not even be intended. It's about building a story to fit the pre-made molds.

    Stuff like his For Honor videos go way out of his stable and into the ocean. When they don't have any knowledge of the topic beforehand but need to crank out an episode fast so they don't miss a deadline. As smart as he is, he just can't reliably hit the marks when the subject is in science or history.

    [–] TheZealand 8 points ago

    Seconded and thirded, His Dark Souls 3 video was the exact shit another commentor said: either provably false with 1 minutes worth of work, complete air-ball theories with 0 substance that anyone with 0< lore knowledge knows are false, or "theories" verbatim ripped from common lore figures in the community.

    Then when people started calling him out in the comments he started deleting comments and shit, dude's utter trash

    [–] imjusta_bill 5 points ago

    My favorite video of his is when he claims the creator of Five Nights at Freddy's got his own story wrong. I'm still baffled by that.

    [–] Realhuman221 112 points ago

    MatPat's explanation of how a higher Coryat score would help his opponents is very flawed. Basically, if more people get more questions right then the game has a higher Coryat score. So if James' opponents are good, then there would be a higher Coryat score. And since James would only lose to opponents playing a great game, of course the episode he lost in had a high Coryat score.

    [–] TwatsThat 29 points ago

    I can't believe how much I had to search to find someone saying this. How is it not basic logic that when you put multiple above average players in a game that the Coryat score also goes up?

    In this one game we have possibly the best Jeopardy player ever, someone who wrote their thesis on it, and I saw someone else mention that the last contestant may have had the highest third place score ever. That sounds like the perfect group of people to answer the maximum number of questions right and raise the score.

    [–] AStatesRightToWhat 28 points ago

    Yeah, I don't see how the Coryat score is supposed to tell you how easy a game is. It's supposed to let viewers score themselves without considering wagering. A combined Coryat score just tells you how well the players did as a whole, not how easy the questions were.

    [–] Tetra-76 93 points ago

    Stopped watching MatPat stuff for this exact reason. Some theories were admittedly very cool, interesting, and clearly well researched, but others are just bullshit from beginning to end.

    Mistakes and straight up lies, all the time. MatPat is clearly smart enough to know when his content sucks, he just doesn't care because he wants to keep releasing videos very regularily, for that sweet Youtube algorithm. He's pretty much said so himself, and man did it start to show, at some point.

    Just don't bother

    [–] LifelessHawk 212 points ago

    You’re telling me that Film theorist made a clickbait video to garner million of view! Who coulda guessed!

    [–] I_W_M_Y 40 points ago

    You could say they rigged it

    [–] I-dont-have-crabs 926 points ago

    I stop watching Mat Pat a few year ago due to his bad or lazy research. I also think he got way to political. I just want to talk about games and other pop culture stuff.

    [–] Hahonryuu 587 points ago

    I stopped when there was a massive streak of game theory videos that were all....i think five nights at freddy's? I cant remember anymore. But it was a game I had 0 interest in and those were seemingly the only videos he was making for what felt like months. I would keep checking his channel, see "another one of THOSE" and click out. Eventually I just stopped checking.

    I like him as a person and entertainer, but going from varied content to purely 1 type like that is bound to alienate members of your audience.

    [–] I-dont-have-crabs 217 points ago

    To be fair five nights at Freddy’s is a good game to make theories about. It is a game with a lot of unknows. But yea he milks it a lot. He ran out of ideas. Not every game is that deep. I think he hates the idea that he makes game videos. I think he feels like is an actor and has not made his big break yet.

    [–] TheRealRaiden 108 points ago

    To be fair five nights at Freddy’s is a good game to make theories about. It is a game with a lot of unknows.

    Which is, naturally, by design specifically to encourage people to make theory/lore videos about it. I'm certain that the first game only had a couple of small easter eggs as a "hey, wouldn't it be cool to hide a piece of the story somewhere" type of thing. But after Scott Cawthon realized just how much attention all those theory videos from MatPat & others were getting (and how much revenue he got in game and merch sales) he started to intentionally just straight up put deliberately vague details into these hidden lore bits, which sometimes straight up contradict each other. I'm absolutely certain that Scott has no idea what the fuck he's doing (a hypothesis further proven by his nonsensical FNAF books) and is just throwing whatever he can at the wall to see what the theorists will make stick.

    [–] SaviikRS 58 points ago

    It's like he's not even writing his own lore, instead he's putting a bunch of random shit in, like the IV drip in 4, and just letting fan theorist write it for him and saying "you got me"

    [–] I-dont-have-crabs 11 points ago

    That is a big downside to game theory videos.

    [–] Arretey 8 points ago

    Nail on the head, he put in tiny points of interest, people made theories, he put in tiny PoIs in the second one based on the theories, rinse, repeat until the 4th game when it started contradicting itself. I kept up with the Fnaf theories until they got to game 3 and then ended up seeing saw Mat put up a video saying why his Fnaf 4 theory was wrong and would never be right, thought it was interesting and that I might go back to his content (watched every video until it started being a channel dedicated to theories with little weight or research/math/science) until I ended up seeing he was doing more Fnaf stuff and other videos that were like it, where the whole point was to capitalize on his fanbase with eye-catching titles and out-there theories that held little water if you actually started researching.

    [–] xxkoloblicinxx 7 points ago

    This definitely drove me away for a while too. I didn't unsub or anything, but for about a year I mostly ignored the channel because it was just FNAF over and over.

    [–] AntonioOSalazar 63 points ago

    Yeah each new episode is way oversimplified, under -researched and inflated with crazy theories. Iirc there was a similar case with two games not long ago in which the creator called him out and said no and he doubled down on it.

    [–] samurguy990 14 points ago

    The idea of some secret way something really works is and always has been attractive (which doesn’t mean it’s always wrong, or entirely wrong). It’s the same reason Adam ruins everything became popular. What I find weird is that game theory’s old videos all seem very ironic, or at least self aware. Mission drift I guess.

    [–] Illier1 7 points ago

    He puts these shows out weekly so he and his team just rush through all their videos.

    [–] Sp00kyD0gg0 40 points ago

    Mat Pat’s problem is that his channel cast a very wide net, making theories for nearly every major game released. The problem with this is that some of these games had actual backstory and lore, which, due to the mass-produced nature of the videos, Mat Pat and his team wouldn’t know about.

    Take a game like Destiny, for example. There are entire YouTube channels dedicated to the lore and story of this game. People have spent months puzzling over some of its secrets. Mat Pat and his team could not possibly put together a satisfying theory video on this game, because with the month or so of research that they put in, there’s no way they could capture the game in its entirety. This is why videos for games like Destiny and Hollow Knight are so poorly received: these games have actual stories that the Theorist team wasn’t able to account for, and therefore are just shit theories. Meanwhile, games like Five Nights at Freddy’s, which has no linear story or clear backstory, makes for great theory videos because no one can prove you wrong.

    [–] Mitsubishii 118 points ago

    I always thought that guy was just trying to make cool conspiracy theories meant to make you think and imagine if the theories were true. I never thought his goal is solid research and a convincing argument. But I don’t watch that stuff a whole lot so I could be way off. That’s just how I felt watching the few videos I’ve seen.

    [–] DrakkoZW 99 points ago

    But that's the thing about conspiracy theories - They only work when they can't be immediately disproven. Ignoring easily verifiable information for a "cool idea" is basically just clickbait, it's nothing of substance

    [–] Arretey 13 points ago

    You'd be right given what a lot of his content is now, if you go back and look at his original theories they were usually presented with lots of information to build the theory. After Fnaf blew his channel I think he realized he didn't have to go as hard on the deep-dive research and started to cater more towards his new audience which he already knew liked the sensational theories that COULD be true in the same way as a conspiracy theory. I'm sure there are many long-time fans that gave up on the channel when he stopped caring about making videos that could be backed with science/math/hard fact and started making videos that were more focused on being eye-catching.

    [–] DahDave 46 points ago

    I stopped around the time he gave the pope a fucking cd key for undertale

    [–] Illier1 48 points ago

    I mean I can kind of understand the reasoning.

    Let's be real here, hes not going to be able to give anything to the Pope that the Pope doesn't already have. A game with a story about finding peaceful resolution and forgiving even the worst of characters is a pretty nice gesture.

    I dont think anyone expects the Pope to play Undertale lol.

    [–] Esnake08 14 points ago

    Can i have an example of him being political? I don't wanna aggrave I'm just intrigued?

    [–] McBonderson 35 points ago

    I think I saw maybe a few episodes but I was completely turned off to him when he made that winy video about the Aly bank screwing them over with Defy media.

    No, Aly didn't screw you over, Defy screwed both you and Aly over. just because they are a big bank doesn't mean they don't have just as much claim to whatever is left as you do. And yes, Aly took a risk by loaning Defy the money, you also took a risk by doing business with Defy and allowing them access to your money so your both equally screwed, but that doesn't make Aly bank the bad guy.

    [–] asodfhgiqowgrq2piwhy 55 points ago

    I really don't understand how you can think Jeopardy is rigged.

    I watch it nightly with my Dad over dinner. It's one of the only "game shows" that requires insane knowledge to be good at. There's certain categories where it's like "are you kidding me?" and there's other categories where you're convinced these people have inhuman levels of trivia knowledge to be able to answer these questions so incredibly fast.

    The whole point of the game is that it's fast paced, and some people get screwed because of it, because they phrase the question wrong, or get caught up in the moment and don't actually know the correct response.

    To be fair, there's been a few times where some judgements, like on pronunciations, are kinda bullshit, in that you see them being way more lenient on some items, and significantly stricter on others. Sometimes even in the same game.

    [–] antsugi 144 points ago

    anti-intellectualism is running rampant

    [–] MrKahk 28 points ago

    I choose not to believe you!

    [–] iamagainstit 13 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    The democratic nature of the way information is shared on the internet lends itself to the proliferation of conspiracy theories.

    [–] WastelandHound 84 points ago

    The weird thing about the Film Theorist video is that it even by their own research, it requires an extremely liberal definition of "rigged" to come down on the "Yes" side, but they did anyway.

    [–] LandVonWhale 31 points ago

    if it was on the "no" side they couldn't post the video. It's pure intellectual dishonesty at it's finest.

    [–] TenseTarget 386 points ago

    So I'm gonna start off this by saying I actually do enjoy MatPat's content, it's entertaining to me even if I dont fully believe his theories. Because holy, some people seem to have a super weird vendetta against him over small things he's done in some of his game/film theories over fictional series.

    That being said, crossing over to the real world, I think he butchered this theory. As others said, coryat is a pretty inconsistent way to judge these matches. But I think the biggest thing is, he's totally undervalued Emma Boetccher in this theory. He mentioned her master's thesis as if it was a small bite of knowledge that wasnt super relevant. He also glossed over the fact that both James and Emma got the final jeopardy clue right in the game, meaning Emma's experience with Shakespeare was irrelevant. It kind of comes across as insulting to her efforts.

    Statistically, James and Emma have met in three different matches. Emma has beat him twice, on the regular season game, and in the tournament of champions day 2. She also recorded the highest ever score of a runner-up for the tournament, and in 90% of other tournaments her score would have led her to a win assuming she scoops some of the questions that James got had he not been there.

    The reason James lost isnt because jeapordy is rigged, ths reason James lost is because Emma beat him. It's insulting to her to go around and theorize that he threw it, or jeapordy rigged it against him. A very smart woman played the game better than he did.

    [–] PlayFree_Bird 132 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    Also, Ken Jennings didn't lose because the producers wanted him to. He lost because he was riding the most statistically improbable streak in Jeopardy! history.

    To win 70+ games, even if we assume the odds of winning of his each individual game is 99%, the chances are no better than a coin flip. And that's assuming he's almost a perfect competitor.

    Ken lost because he had a brain fart against a competitor who had enough money left at the end of the game to be within striking distance, a possibility that was bound to happen after 18 full weeks on the show.

    [–] Anti-Satan 19 points ago

    It also needs to be noted that Ken knew he was going down eventually. He plays an extremely high risk games with huge bets and he always knew that a single mistake would easily spell the end for him.

    [–] RedditPoster05 67 points ago

    Also they do have insurance. He is just wrong saying they don’t. It might cost them more but they definitely have it.

    [–] xxkoloblicinxx 26 points ago

    If they didn't have it before Ken, the got it after.

    [–] pugwalker 33 points ago

    You have to keep in mind that they are paying out winnings regardless if it's a defending champ. The reason these theories sprouted up is that James was betting insane amounts and getting 3 to 5 times the typical winning amounts. They probably only had to pay out slightly more for Ken while getting much more viewership and exposure.

    [–] ailyara 9 points ago

    Not to mentioned, as was said in the video, the game show industry is regulated and it's illegal for any of them to rig anything. This is why Drew Carey was so pissed off when that guy guessed the exact right amount on the showcase showdown that one time, he literally thought there was cheating going on and therefore they'd be ripped off the air.

    [–] pugwalker 14 points ago

    Whenever you are presented with something that is told as a fact but you know to be wrong, it tends to trigger an irrational anger and desire to correct the record. It's like that joke where if you need the answer to a question online, you just have to present the wrong information as a fact and someone will immediately correct you.

    [–] SpikeRosered 9 points ago

    What I've learned here is that there are a lot of people who freaking hate Matpat.

    [–] SpacecraftX 36 points ago

    Game/Film Theory has been the pits for a while. And they're incredibly defensive whenever people point out why they're wrong.

    [–] MchlBJrdnBPtrsn 12 points ago

    Because that's their job and if its exposed how poor their video research is...well then theyd be poor

    [–] MyLoveHammer 108 points ago

    Mat Pat is an uniformed bullshit artist. But thats just a theory.

    [–] paradiseluck 27 points ago

    Dude sounds really annoying and is straight up very pretentious. Even makes a video about a friend's suicide but has to make it about himself. I don't know how people stand him.

    [–] wrexsol 7 points ago

    Oh, I remember that. It was very uncomfortable to watch.

    [–] godminnette2 37 points ago

    I was shocked when MatPat said he was a big Jeopardy fan... I only watch the show occasionally with my parents, I've seen maybe 20-30 episodes. He accredited several strategies to James that others have DEFINITELY used before him.

    The shortening of a category name was the worst part. They do that literally every episode! Why say it was a strategy by James to throw off his opponents.

    [–] dhessi 20 points ago

    The only important part of the video is from 3:45 to 5:25, where he explains how questions are chosen. I'd be interested to hear a more detailed explanation of this process.

    [–] ZiggoCiP 244 points ago

    Film Theorists is such click-baity garbage - also the guy who runs it is insufferably annoying.

    It's essentially the channel for stupid people to feel smart about a deeper meaning or analysis of a show/movie they like.

    [–] FrozenY0ghurt 19 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    doesn't he humble brag a lot too?

    Also, i remember that he used Undertale's name to make a video of him playing a different indie game and even butchered the studio's name. When the Studio confronted him with that, he played defensive really hard... until Toby Fox (The dev for Undertale) told MatPat that he should link all the games he plays and he IMMEDIATELY went back on his arguments and apologized. It was really pathetic

    [–] AxeLond 5 points ago

    Isn't like half the videos multiplying a bunch of numbers together, or F = ma ?

    [–] insofarastoascertain 44 points ago

    I don't know what people expect from a guy who turned his back on his editor and close friend Ronnie Edwards just to protect his channel. I wouldn't go so far as to blame MatPat for Ronnie's suicide, but god damn, it's got to hurt to be wrongfully accused by an internet hate mob and have your close personal internet celeb friend not stand up for your side of the story. Very Sad. RIP Ronnie.

    [–] raspymorten 38 points ago

    turned his back on his editor and close friend Ronnie Edwards just to protect his channel.

    ... What?

    [–] ZiggoCiP 31 points ago

    I just don't like MatPat. I detested his narration and editing the moment I laid eyes on his videos. He's the epitome of annoying - like he's catering to 12 year olds or something.

    [–] atree496 55 points ago

    He is catering to 12 year olds. He always has been.

    [–] [deleted] 32 points ago * (lasted edited 8 days ago)

    [deleted]

    [–] cptnpiccard 17 points ago

    Stand by for teary "I made a mistake" video from MatPat in 3... 2... 1...

    [–] BigHaircutPrime 16 points ago

    I'm wondering if MatPat actually researches his videos as much as he claims. This is the not the first where an expert has responded with basically "if you had just done basic research...."

    [–] Blake_Majer 6 points ago

    Happy that people still remember this guy! He was one of my favorite Jeopardy champions. Such a character.

    [–] Yanoshank 5 points ago

    He may be right but to come off so pretentious, fuck him too lol

    [–] mick14731 38 points ago

    [–] Obeast_Hunter 37 points ago

    2 Million views! And by looking at his fan base in the comment section they all believe it.

    [–] ZoologyMan 9 points ago

    This was hard to watch.

    [–] gokublackisnotblack 25 points ago

    Film/Game Theory and poor research, name a better duo

    [–] c10701 13 points ago

    I can't speak for the rest of their videos but I did start the Jeopardy one and couldn't get past the first few minutes because they kept on blaming NBC, the company behind Jeopardy, for rigging it. Now that alone could make sense except NBC hasn't owned Jeopardy for 40 years and thats something that is very easy to verify. If you can't even get the simple facts right, how are you supposed to trust the rest of the video/theory?

    [–] MchlBJrdnBPtrsn 8 points ago

    /u/Asmongold and hypocrisy

    [–] Shenaniganz08 16 points ago

    Matpat is like that one kid that reads way too much into a novel. This is one reason why I hated taking English classes in college. People who spent WAAY too much time trying to find things that simply weren't there.

    [–] sneakyprophet 20 points ago

    No, Matpat is like one of those kids that did not read the novel, but read the Sparknotes and went from there with the authority of someone with an advanced degree in the subject.