Editorial Previews and the gaming media

[Vault Dweller]

Tags: Loki

Let's look at the preview practices of the gaming media, using Loki as an example. <a href=http://www.loki-game.com>Loki</a> is yet another "epic" action RPG, yet another attempt to capitalize on Diablo 2 success, yet another spectacular failure. Reviews tore apart the game's weak mechanics and dull gameplay, describing it as "less entertaining than watching someone else watch TV", but <b>hands-on</b> previews showed complete ignorance of Loki's numerous faults. Why? Because to journalists these faults, according to Patrick the GameSpy journalist, weren't "even real".
<br>
<br>
<a href=http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=158>Click here to continue</a>

 

[Deleted member 7219]

It's a common problem on gaming sites. They praise the game and build up the hype, then when it comes out, if it comes from a small or indie developer they slam it, if it comes from a big developer they love it. Has nothing to do whether it is bad or not.

 

[obediah]

VD - you really need to clean that article up. Maybe come up with some standard of indented, italic, and bold so we don't have to guess who is saying what. It's dangerously close to an incomprehensible crazy person rant - a topic I have some experience with.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Suggestions?

It's dangerously close to an incomprehensible crazy person rant - a topic I have some experience with.

We all have

 

[Kingston]

Kinda insipred me to do a quick photoshop.

I plan on making a proper one with lots of jurnahlists and a memorable quote under each one.

 

[Joe Krow]

Kinda insipred me to do a quick photoshop.

I plan on making a proper one with lots of jurnahlists and a memorable quote under each one.

Great idea. I propose a "Wall of Shame" link on the front page.

 

[Walkin' Dude]

To be a gaming journalist, is it required that you look like you take it up the ass?

 

[obediah]

Suggestions?

The first bit is confusing because you have 2 quotations, but 3 headings ( "Epigraph", "Patrick Joynt, a GameSpy journalist", "Loki website " ). If you took the convention of the rest of the article - i.e. source as link before the quotation that would help. In particular more context for the Joynt quote would be helpful.

Beyond that, you're out of my editorial league. Much of the blame lies on the quality of text your quoting. When 80% of an article is retarded game journalist babble, there's not a lot you can do with the other 20% to fix the thing as a whole. Maybe the transition from previews to reviews could be done better. I don't really know.

One other specific suggestion - maybe bold Uros's comments and label them as such. I just assumed the Captain Sarcasm comment was yours at first.

 

[MetalCraze]

To be a gaming journalist, is it required that you look like you take it up the ass?

No. It is required that you take it up the ass actually. Like - Gamespot job, a high skill of blowjob is required.
I don't trust any paper magazines now. Take any of that crap - there are NO bad previews at all. And it feels like each preview was done using a pre-made script: the whole article we praise the game then there's a very little bashing of graphics and then it's usually "but it looks like a promising game".
writing previews should be trusted to computers already.

 

[obediah]

To be a gaming journalist, is it required that you look like you take it up the ass?

No. It is required that you take it up the ass actually. Like - Gamespot job, a high skill of blowjob is required.
I don't trust any paper magazines now. Take any of that crap - there are NO bad previews at all. And it feels like each preview was done using a pre-made script: the whole article we praise the game then there's a very little bashing of graphics and then it's usually "but it looks like a promising game".
writing previews should be trusted to computers already.

To be fair, I don't ever remember previews being analytical. I started reading computer and video game magazines in the mid-late 80's and even then previews had a positive spin. About the worst I can ever remember seeing in a preview is something like "at times the game was sluggish, but we were assured this would be resolved when the debugging code was removed". You do see less focus in the target audience than you used to which is bad. Whereas before you might have seen, "The action is fast and furious, if you like to think before acting or have slow reflexes you might skip this one", now you just would see "This game is full of action and excitement."

The real insanity isn't in positive previews, but rather pre-orders, early reviews and release day madness. The point of a preview is to describe what a game is like and get the target audience excited about it. It really doesn't make sense to judge a game before the final copy is ready. If after previewing a game you don't have enough nice things to say about it for an article, then you just don't preview the game. Save the criticisms until you have the review copy in hand.

 

[Vault Dweller]

What do you think about my DoP preview? Just curious.

As for the Patrick's quote and possible "out of context" concerns:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic ... 301#389301

 

[obediah]

What do you think about my DoP preview? Just curious.

I hadn't read it because the game doesn't interest me. I tried to read just now so I could comment, but I hate diablo clones and RTSs so I'm not sure how I could get through the whole thing without being biased.

As for the Patrick's quote and possible "out of context" concerns:
http://www.rpgcodex.net/phpBB/viewtopic ... 301#389301

Oh, yikes. I'm not going near the drama in that thread! :shock: But thanks for the link.

 

[Elhoim]

To be a gaming journalist, is it required that you look like you take it up the ass?

And some of them seem to be taking it up the ass in the same moment the picture was taken.

 

[GhanBuriGhan]

I might regret saying this, but I would like to read more VD and less cut n' paste please. After you finished that piece of vaporware of yours :D

 

[Vault Dweller]

It was a quick piece. I noticed the difference and put something together in about 20 min. Too long for a newspost, probably too short for an editorial.

 

[Woetohice]

__

 

[Section8]

How dependent is gaming media on game publishers for cash? Don't they make enough to pay the bills from advertising since they're usually owned by larger media corps?

There would be no point in a business persisting with a publication that simply drains from the ad revenue generated by the rest of the media corp - it has to be profitable in and of itself. And the most logical way to get that ad revenue is to sell ad space to businesses with vested interest in the gamer demographic - game publishers.

Do journalists still get payola (flying "journalists" to swank nightclubs filled with strippers, sending them to firing ranges to test out guns, test drive exotic cars, etc.)?

From what I hear, it's become less prolific than it was around the turn of the century, just because today's whores are fucking cheap - most don't need to be bought - they'll whore themselves out just for the novelty of getting paid to play games and gush for a few paragraphs.

As i understood it there are several types of previews: The developer goes through a walkthrough demo with no hands on for the previewer, developer lets the previewer get some hands on time but they're watching and guiding over the shoulder, developer sends a alpha/beta build to the journalist to try out.

It used to be that the media would get a preview build of the game and do their thing. The fact that "hands-off" and supervised previews are becoming more commonplace is just indicative of just how subservient the gaming media is.

 

[Mefi]

Let's look at the preview practices of the gaming media, using Loki as an example. <a>Loki</a> is yet another "epic" action RPG, yet another attempt to capitalize on Diablo 2 success, yet another spectacular failure. Reviews tore apart the game's weak mechanics and dull gameplay, describing it as "less entertaining than watching someone else watch TV", but <b>hands-on</b> previews showed complete ignorance of Loki's numerous faults. Why? Because to journalists these faults, according to Patrick the GameSpy journalist, weren't "even real".

I'm not certain what you're after VD - this has been the way with all reviews since the dawn of time. The simple fact is that the preview stuff is often very highly polished (so not journos' fault if they assume whole game is like that) plus you have to keep one eye on the advertising potential if you plump the game nicely. You also want to give games the benefit of the doubt.

What is wrong is the way that indie games are often used as whipping boys for the industry whilst more affluent publishers/developers can get away with any old shit without being called on it. The internet was meant to put an end to the whole incestuous relationship between journalism and advertising, but it didn't quite work out that way..

 

[Sir_Brennus]

... yet another failure...

How do you know? Did YOU play it? Why do you believe retarded reviews from journalists who can't write an informing preview?

How do you know, that it is worse than Titan Quest, which was hailed as the second coming of christ in its reviews?

Why don't you apply your journalistic standards to your editiorial?

 

[Lingwe]

Come on, stop being so mean - you'll cost people jobs if you point out flaws in a preview. Didn't you learn that from Patrick?