GameSpy wishes for the Fallout fans to die

[JoKa]

@patrick
nice to know that one of those 'two opposing views' presented by GameSpy is "I hope [Fallout fans] really get a horrible disease and die"...

how is this in any way dampened by your response?

 

[Claw]

GameSpy Debriefings: 91:10: Patrick Joynt (me), in response to Allen's oft-quoted vitriol:

"I love Fallout. I'm a member of the Fallout fan community."

I'm curious how come we're not seeing as many quotes of that, or hearing it in audio clips, or hearing "The GameSpy Debriefings #8 presents two opposing views on something!"

It was pretty easy to overhear though, it sort of goes under with the laughing and the fact that Allen just keeps ranting. Besides, how are you presenting an opposing view? Your quick remark doesn't really oppose Allen's rant at all.

I'm not trying to take away from the offense you all felt (regardless that I didn't) as members of the community to hyperbole, but I'm really curious.

I guess how much offense one takes may depend on how much one really feels as part of "the Fallout community" - You know, the community of bitter nerds living in the past, putting Fallout on a pedestral, never being satisfied.
I certainly don't believe I can't be satisfied, or that I can't enjoy games that are different from Fallout. Yet I do have good cause to feel addressed. Because I know I'm not someone who would say that STALKER "looks like a first person Fallout" or that "lol, bloody mess" shows any understanding of Fallout's dark humor. It's not that we agree with the stupid stereotypes divulged by the likes of an Allen Rausch, we just know we're meant.
And apparently, if you aren't blown away with the amazing graphics of Bethesda's improved engine and doubt that V.A.T.S. is the best idea since sliced bread, that just proves you're an evil, nasty Fallout fan.

feedback.gamespy.com is our feedback address.It's in the podcast I believe right before and right after our Fallout discussion; the "archive" feedback address usually results in 500 errors.

Actually, this address just redirects me to the archive address.

I'll be hanging around here and chatting with anyone who's interested while I have time this week though, so you'll get a faster reply talking to me directly if you like.

So, have you already poked out Allen's eyes? If not, why not? He clearly asked for it. Also, go ahead and mash his testicles with a hammer even though it's clearly too late. I suppose retroactive abortion of his children would be asked too much?

 

[deadairis]

@patrick
nice to know that one of those 'two opposing views' presented by GameSpy is "I hope [Fallout fans] really get a horrible disease and die"...

how is this in any way dampened by your response?

What would be a "dampening" response you're more interested in? Wishing a horrible disease upon him in return? What does that do but prove his point? Tell him that's not how he feels? Well, it's clearly hyperbolic, so why bother?

What's more relevant there than to simply say that I'm one of those people he's talking about and call him on it? Did he leave the room, as his "I'd rathers" indicated? No, we just kept chatting.

As opposed to a lot of response I have seen here, and on NMA, this weekend. Which has included choice bits like Allen should have a poker shoved up him, or that I should have (the post just before this one, I believe) retroactively aborted his children? Honestly, with responses like that, why would he feel any other way about the community?

That noted, I still think that making it clear that it's hyperbole and nothing more by calling him on it was a solid rebuttal. And, as opposed to proving his point by following up on some community member's suggestions and threatening him, spewing more vitriol back, or other behavior that Allen is being slammed for but is, apparently, okay if it's directed at Allen, I think it was about the only worthwhile rebuttal.

Hopefully, that makes sense?

 

[sheek]

Patrick, I listened to the whole 'podcast' and if you're supposed to be a 'journalist', you're almost as much of a disgrace as him. Stick around, read some newsposts and maybe learn how to do your job. Or go back to GameSpy, collect your paycheck and continue being a worthless loser/hack.

But don't expect to get a lot sympathy for such a pathetic statement as "I love Fallout". You honestly think anybody cares whether you 'love' Fallout? Are you fucking retarded? No, we just want you to do your fucking job...

 

[bossjimbob]

oh noes, wishes of ill will over the intertube? I will not stand for this.

lolz

 

[Mr Happy]

Lol, gaming journalism.

Patrick, it seems pretty obvious that all of the "vitrol" being "spewed back" is either mocking our friend Allen's choice of words or hyperbole in itself. Part of the point some were trying to make is that it's all "omg" to say something like that about a gaming "journalist", hyperbolic or not, but the other way around, it's just L0L at those angry fallout fans living in the past. It's pretty obvious it he does not want all fallout fans to die, big suprise there, but so what? That never matters in 'da real world".

Personally, I am not at all offended (it's pretty hard to take internet threats like that seriously, we care oh so much about Allen's opinion, etc), it seems more an insult to GameSpy's credibility than to fans of fallout. Some day, things might reach a point where gaming journalism will be serious buisness. Until then, keep up the professionalism!

 

[Amasius]

... the clip Brother None created

This seems to be a good example how game "journalists" like yourself work nowadays. Like Brother None stated in his newspost the excerpt of the podcast wasn't created by him but by DarkLegacy.

Do your homework, learn your job, get a clue.

 

[deadairis]

... the clip Brother None created

This seems to be a good example how game "journalists" like yourself work nowadays. Like Brother None stated in his newspost the excerpt of the podcast wasn't created by him but by DarkLegacy.

Do your homework, learn your job, get a clue.

What can I say, I'm not actually working. I'm just here on my weekend because I felt the community deserved more than an automated feedback form. And, honestly, my job isn't community manager -- even if I was working atm. I'm pleased as punch for the correction though; when I'm not just writing from my phone I'll be sure to edit & credit my original post.

 

[callehe]

I was more offended by the retard that suggested that fallout fans claimed that there was no war on the east coast and that the fallout fans disliked the fact that Ron Pearlman is in the game. Both these examples of "rabidness" on part of the fans are just plain wrong. Worse is that Allen agrees to this, proving that in fact he has been out of touch of the community for quite som time, or else he would know that no such sentiment exist among the fans. It wouls seem that he still holds bitterness from the FOT days... I don't know what Roshambo did to him back then, but if it is anything short of anal rape then I shall be midly suprised.

 

[deadairis]

Lol, gaming journalism.

Patrick, it seems pretty obvious that all of the "vitrol" being "spewed back" is either mocking our friend Allen's choice of words or hyperbole in itself. Part of the point some were trying to make is that it's all "omg" to say something like that about a gaming "journalist", hyperbolic or not, but the other way around, it's just L0L at those angry fallout fans living in the past. It's pretty obvious it he does not want all fallout fans to die, big suprise there, but so what? That never matters in 'da real world".

Personally, I am not at all offended (it's pretty hard to take internet threats like that seriously, we care oh so much about Allen's opinion, etc), it seems more an insult to GameSpy's credibility than to fans of fallout. Some day, things might reach a point where gaming journalism will be serious buisness. Until then, keep up the professionalism!

Would you say, then, that the response is mostly either easily ignored hyperbole or people using this as a "gaming journalism isn't journalism" soapbox? And honestly, thanks to everyone for talking about this with me. I appreciate it.

 

[Zomg]

Rosh probably, just this moment, dropped out of the IGN/Gamespot/whatever ceiling and garroted the guy.

 

[deadairis]

I was more offended by the retard that suggested that fallout fans claimed that there was no war on the east coast and that the fallout fans disliked the fact that Ron Pearlman is in the game. Both these examples of "rabidness" on part of the fans are just plain wrong. Worse is that Allen agrees to this, proving that in fact he has been out of touch of the community for quite som time, or else he would know that no such sentiment exist among the fans. It wouls seem that he still holds bitterness from the FOT days... I don't know what Roshambo did to him back then, but if it is anything short of anal rape then I shall be midly suprised.

For what it's worth, I actually raised those points. They were both brought up to me as issues the Fallout hardcore fanbase was upset about, not by Allen. Not, for what it's worth, necessarily the people on this forum -- but those are actually voiced complaints from some hard-core Fallout fans.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

What would be a "dampening" response you're more interested in? Wishing a horrible disease upon him in return? What does that do but prove his point? Tell him that's not how he feels? Well, it's clearly hyperbolic, so why bother?

Do what the rest of the journalistic community does and have the fortitude to take responsibility for what you or your colleagues say. No other branch of journalism would even think of making some sort of remark like your brilliant comrade made, because people would be furious and would hold them accountable. Hell, Imus had a reputation for being an all around jerk and was never considered more than entertainment, but his "nappy-headed hos" comment pissed people off. And you know what? He got the boot because he crossed a line. And I think a death wish is far, far, over that line.

What's more relevant there than to simply say that I'm one of those people he's talking about and call him on it? Did he leave the room, as his "I'd rathers" indicated? No, we just kept chatting.

Wow...what a pitiful defense. Because you were a Fallout fan (and obviously his friend and colleague) he wouldn't just leave the room. You guys tried a joke and nobody laughed but people took offense. Now you have to man up and deal with the consequences.

As opposed to a lot of response I have seen here, and on NMA, this weekend. Which has included choice bits like Allen should have a poker shoved up him, or that I should have (the post just before this one, I believe) retroactively aborted his children? Honestly, with responses like that, why would he feel any other way about the community?

Ok...first off, NMA has a policy against threats against people. Read their rules, they don't allow them. Not even towards Chuck Cuevas and Herve Caen. Nice spin job though. Are you gunning for Pete Hine's job as Master of Lies?

As for here versus your podcast. Let's have a little reality check bucko. This forum is a mostly obscure place in the internet. You guys happen to be a "legitimate" media outlet. We're bound by the law to not post or say anything highly illegal. You guys are bound by journalistic ethics to be unbiased unless otherwise spoken to the contrary, and to not say highly offensive stuff among other things.

And as for certain community responses here. It's okay to write his comments off as "humor" and simple hyperbole, but when when somebody on the internet says something equally in hyperbole...they deserve the fate he said they should face? Nice.

That noted, I still think that making it clear that it's hyperbole and nothing more by calling him on it was a solid rebuttal.

No. It wasn't. Any other kind of journalist would be getting some serious flak now. A music critic who said something akin to "Rap fans are stupid, ignorant, and arrogant and I hope they get a terrible disease and die" would immediately be lambasted beyond belief, even if it was clearly in hyperbole. You know why? Some things just aren't in good taste, and never will be.

And, as opposed to proving his point by following up on some community member's suggestions and threatening him, spewing more vitriol back, or other behavior that Allen is being slammed for but is, apparently, okay if it's directed at Allen, I think it was about the only worthwhile rebuttal.

How do you know they aren't hyperbole or sarcasm oh omnipotent one?

Hopefully, that makes sense?

Something sure makes sense to me. You guys screwed up seriously. Specifically this Allen fellow and you don't have the courage to admit it and take the consequence like men. And you continue to make the videogame journalism profession look like a festering cesspool of idiocy, incompetence, and ignorance.

So grow a pair and start understanding you can't say whatever you damn well please on public broadcasts without consequence. You might want to issue some sort of public apology or some sort of damage control before somebody gets really upset. You wouldn't want your friend to go the way of Imus, would you?

 

[Claw]

What would be a "dampening" response you're more interested in? Wishing a horrible disease upon him in return?

Saying that the Fallout communits actually voices reasonable criticism rather than blind hatred would have been a sensible, opposing response.

What's more relevant there than to simply say that I'm one of those people he's talking about and call him on it? Did he leave the room, as his "I'd rathers" indicated? No, we just kept chatting.

That just shows he doesn't consider you part of the Fallout community he was talking about. You didn't actually "call him on it" and he didn't stop. He merely changed his target from "Fallout Community" to "Fallout Forums" while staying in tune with his previous statement.

And then we have one of you guys making fun of Fallout fans by voicing a complaint so retarded, anyone using it would get dumbfucked on this forum and Rosh would've given him a new avatar on NMA.
Long after you supposedly presented an opposing viewpoint, the ludicrous ranting about rabid Fallout fans went on in a manner best described as ignorant, stupid and arrogant.

Have a nice day.

PS:

For what it's worth, I actually raised those points. They were both brought up to me as issues the Fallout hardcore fanbase was upset about, not by Allen. Not, for what it's worth, necessarily the people on this forum -- but those are actually voiced complaints from some hard-core Fallout fans.

Lots of idiots call themselves Fallout fans. I can find some incredibly idiotic remark by someone who calls himself an Elder Scrolls, Halo or Quake fan and then cite him as an example of their hardcore fanbases. There is a word for that.
Actually, there are many words for that. Loathsome is just one of them. If there is one thing that marks the true hardcore Fallout fanbase, it's being anal-retentive about details of the game. Any moron using an argument as stupid as what you cited would be ostracized by the the true hardcore Fallout fans.

 

[bossjimbob]

The comment was irresponsible for a professional site, but there are some vocal Fallout fans who lack the ability to voice an opinion without being condescending, dramatic, or simply irritating. Unfortunately, bad behavior begets an equally bad response.

 

[Mr Happy]

Would you say, then, that the response is mostly either easily ignored hyperbole or people using this as a "gaming journalism isn't journalism" soapbox? And honestly, thanks to everyone for talking about this with me. I appreciate it.

Actually, I haven't read the thread at NMA, but over here, the majority of the response seems to be lakcing in threats, hyperbolic or otherwise. I actually interepreted Claw's response as more of a mockery than any sort of hyperbole, but anyway.

As for the "gaming journalism isnt journalism" thing, well, it's been a long day, so sorry if my response came off that way . But really, when an editor of a rather prominent gaming journalism site says stuff like that in a podcast, hyperbolic or not, it becomes a little hard to take content from that outlet seriously, and see that person as a serious journalist. You see to see that sort of unprofessionalism all over gaming journalism, as well. Gamespot polls (one in particular), previews/reviews built as hype machines (see http://www.cvgames.com/?p=2722) , poor research, bizarre reviewing principles, yadadada, gaming journalism seems to be about speaking to a young, less mature audience. I'm sure part of that is the nature of many games these days, but a lot of gaming journalism quality and content supports this as well. Not that everything has to be ultra-uptight-professional (I don't think RPG codex is always about that, but then it doesn't really claim to be), but if you are trying to appear as some sort of proffessional and respectable journalism outfit, Allen can't really go around saying stuff like that. Do a quick compare with the movie reviewing industry (admittedly, a lot of bs there too, but anyhow, it's been around a bit longer), you can't really be a serious reviewer and hyperbolicly ask for the death of the star wars fans. You can be a not-so-serious reviewer and do that, but where's the big name respect? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Anyway, nice of you to drop by and respond

edit: goddam, the url tag wont work

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Would you say, then, that the response is mostly either easily ignored hyperbole or people using this as a "gaming journalism isn't journalism" soapbox? And honestly, thanks to everyone for talking about this with me. I appreciate it.

The issue for me, Mr GameSpy representative / concerned employee / whatever, is that once again, Fallout fans are evil and wrong and "this Fallout will be the best ever OMG!".

We've been there, done that. Remember Fallout: Tactics? Remember: Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? Both of those were praised to high heaven by the gaming media. Fallout fans looked at them and went "Where's the RPG? Where's the 'Fallout'"? But no, the fans were wrong because these games were totally awesome and everything the fans ever wanted.

What happened? The games came out and the Fallout fans were right. The games sucked and they had very little Fallout in them, if any at all. What's happening now? Every review you find that mentions Tactics or Brotherhood of Steel today mentions that both games sucked or were "poor copies". Funny, that's not what we were told when the hype machine was in full swing.

Fact is, you're in the gaming media business and for years now, the gaming media business has hyped to Holy Hell everything about any game before it came out. Not once have you looked at anything critically and said "Gee, that sounds a bit... odd". Oh no, every word is dripped on becase this will be completely awesome. Now, do you remember Oblivion? Do you remember the totally awesome AI? Back then, we said it sounded like bunkum but oh no, we were just bad fans who deserved to die. Now look at what you see being said about Oblivion's AI. Fallout's will be better because "Oblivion made a lot of mistakes". Uhhh... That's what we've been saying. Nice of you guys to catch up.

Now it's all happening again. Bethesda hype machine is in full swing almost a year before this thing is even coming out. On one side, we have the fans who are looking at Bethesda past performance with a critical eye and saying "Oblivion sucked" (No really, it did, just see the comments on their own forum about it) but we were told by everyone else on the other side that it would be really awesome. Those people who said it would be awesome now admit (and jump on the fan bandwagon) that the game was lacking in a whole bunch of areas. The fans were right. Yet here we are again, going through the same bullshit again.

Here's the thing, Fallout 3 is going to come out within the next 12 months and when it does, GameSpy, GameSpot and everyone else will once again come over to the fans side and realise that it wasn't all that crash hot they said it was and that Bethesda still don't know how to make a fucking decent RPG. Thing is, we'll still go through all of this again with whatever the next over-hyped piece of bullshit is.

 

[robur]

Word on the street (NMA) is he was the marketing manager for Tactics.

http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/fallout-tactics-brotherhood-of-steel-/credits

 

[robur]

change the words "fallout fans" to [name of ethnic group] and his comments would be offensive for a journalist. but since we're dealing with fallout fans, there's no harm done right...

Well, you actually find that double standard in other parts of the media.

I would love to see a comedian making fun of Allah, Krishna, Buddha and what not - but no, it's always the Christians. Over in Europe it's even worse - if they do a cartoon featuring Mohammed with a bomb on his turban, people are getting death threats and embassies are burning.

So, being made fun of as the Fallout hardcore community isn't something that special really.

 

[Koby]

http://corp.ign.com/articles/655/655807p1.html

 

[deadairis]

Sorry if this drags on a bit, but this is a really good topic. Incidentally, I'm...uh, probably GameSpy's Mr. "Not at work, or posting on behalf of the company." Patrick would be just dandy. Joynt is probably easier to remember.

Previews are a funny thing. When we (GameSpy) preview a game, we have to make sure we get the facts to our readers. Not what might or might not be, but facts. But that's...well, that's a press release. Part of what we bring, or try to bring, to the table is our experience. This is more important than it sounds.

When you see a preview of a game, you're seeing a very small slice. You're probably seeing a build that's incredibly early, in terms of features and technical stuff being done. What we have to do is make sure that we don't ream a game's preview -- unfinished -- code for being unfinished, but at the same time make sure we don't give a game a review before we've actually played it.

Previews and reviews go hand in hand. They're not useless without each other, but part of what they should do is make sure that by the time you get to the "reading a review" stage, you're familiar with the game's actual features - covered in the previews. Ideally, the previewer has given you a good idea of how those features come together, how they relate to the standards you should expect. Our preview writer was Thierry Scooter Nguyen, who you might remember from OPM before it folded, or CGW before that. If he'd seen a shambeling pile of garbage, you'd have read that.

But, for the most part, reviewing is meant for reviews. Some things are so astounding -- such as Bioshock -- that's its easy to point at them and say "wow, this will be amazing." That can bite a previewer in the ass if it turns out it's not amazing, though. Ideally, we give you previews to get a good idea of what a game is offering, followed by reviews and SpyHunter sessions to give you a good idea of how all those offerings actually came together as a whole.

I'm not sure how much that addressed your issue as much as you'd like, but previews and reviews are definitly meant to go hand-in-hand. It also helps if you can get a real feel for the actual person writing the reviews and previews , usually by a little adroit google-fu.

Anyways.
Patrick

Would you say, then, that the response is mostly either easily ignored hyperbole or people using this as a "gaming journalism isn't journalism" soapbox? And honestly, thanks to everyone for talking about this with me. I appreciate it.

The issue for me, Mr GameSpy representative / concerned employee / whatever, is that once again, Fallout fans are evil and wrong and "this Fallout will be the best ever OMG!".

We've been there, done that. Remember Fallout: Tactics? Remember: Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel? Both of those were praised to high heaven by the gaming media. Fallout fans looked at them and went "Where's the RPG? Where's the 'Fallout'"? But no, the fans were wrong because these games were totally awesome and everything the fans ever wanted.

What happened? The games came out and the Fallout fans were right. The games sucked and they had very little Fallout in them, if any at all. What's happening now? Every review you find that mentions Tactics or Brotherhood of Steel today mentions that both games sucked or were "poor copies". Funny, that's not what we were told when the hype machine was in full swing.

Fact is, you're in the gaming media business and for years now, the gaming media business has hyped to Holy Hell everything about any game before it came out. Not once have you looked at anything critically and said "Gee, that sounds a bit... odd". Oh no, every word is dripped on becase this will be completely awesome. Now, do you remember Oblivion? Do you remember the totally awesome AI? Back then, we said it sounded like bunkum but oh no, we were just bad fans who deserved to die. Now look at what you see being said about Oblivion's AI. Fallout's will be better because "Oblivion made a lot of mistakes". Uhhh... That's what we've been saying. Nice of you guys to catch up.

Now it's all happening again. Bethesda hype machine is in full swing almost a year before this thing is even coming out. On one side, we have the fans who are looking at Bethesda past performance with a critical eye and saying "Oblivion sucked" (No really, it did, just see the comments on their own forum about it) but we were told by everyone else on the other side that it would be really awesome. Those people who said it would be awesome now admit (and jump on the fan bandwagon) that the game was lacking in a whole bunch of areas. The fans were right. Yet here we are again, going through the same bullshit again.

Here's the thing, Fallout 3 is going to come out within the next 12 months and when it does, GameSpy, GameSpot and everyone else will once again come over to the fans side and realise that it wasn't all that crash hot they said it was and that Bethesda still don't know how to make a fucking decent RPG. Thing is, we'll still go through all of this again with whatever the next over-hyped piece of bullshit is.

 

[robur]

But, for the most part, reviewing is meant for reviews. Some things are so astounding -- such as Bioshock -- that's its easy to point at them and say "wow, this will be amazing." That can bite a previewer in the ass if it turns out it's not amazing, though. Ideally, we give you previews to get a good idea of what a game is offering, followed by reviews and SpyHunter sessions to give you a good idea of how all those offerings actually came together as a whole.

Hi Patrick,

as a colleague who's written a ton of articles about computer and video games since 1993, I've developed a slightly different attitude. In a preview, I'd like to present facts about the game, just like you. But I'd rather save the hyperbole for the actual review - which shouldn't so much list all the facts that have been jotted down in all those previews once more but rather should tell the readers whether the game IS FUN TO PLAY or not.

Even more so as at many preview events, we don't even get to play the game ourselves. Which does make a huge difference. Play through an instance in WoW, say, the opening of the Dark Portal. Lots of stress and excitement for the player, but supremely boring to watch for anyone not playing.

I'd love to see more of a movie writing approach to games writing - when I read a preview or set visit or interview with an actor/director/etc., no journalist is writing about how fricking awesome the movie is going to be - because they have not SEEN it yet.

Best wishes,
- Roland

 

[deadairis]

Sorry, I'll try to make this shorter so it's more clear:
Previews should let you know what to expect from a game in terms of individual parts, and a good previewer will find insight to offer beyond what the press release could do;
Reviews should express how those parts come together as a cohesive, quality whole.

Previews, I think, often come off sounding as hyperbolic when, say, you weren't offered anything negative to talk about and no one will answer questions otherwise. My recent Bioshock preview, on the otherhand, is unabashedly positive. I've seen enough games 3 months from release to be able to see that Bioshock has a real shot at being not just good, but stunning. Even then, though, potential issues were still raised. I'll also note that just about all GameSpy previews make clear when we get actual hands-on, some screens and a speech, or what.

I think game-writing as movie-writing is an interesting idea, but is it tenable? Look at how much actually gets released about a movie before it's released -- very little, and most of it fluff.

I think that previews being taken as just that, and reviews as just that, would be a great first step.

But, for the most part, reviewing is meant for reviews. Some things are so astounding -- such as Bioshock -- that's its easy to point at them and say "wow, this will be amazing." That can bite a previewer in the ass if it turns out it's not amazing, though. Ideally, we give you previews to get a good idea of what a game is offering, followed by reviews and SpyHunter sessions to give you a good idea of how all those offerings actually came together as a whole.

Hi Patrick,

as a colleague who's written a ton of articles about computer and video games since 1993, I've developed a slightly different attitude. In a preview, I'd like to present facts about the game, just like you. But I'd rather save the hyperbole for the actual review - which shouldn't so much list all the facts that have been jotted down in all those previews once more but rather should tell the readers whether the game IS FUN TO PLAY or not.

Even more so as at many preview events, we don't even get to play the game ourselves. Which does make a huge difference. Play through an instance in WoW, say, the opening of the Dark Portal. Lots of stress and excitement for the player, but supremely boring to watch for anyone not playing.

I'd love to see more of a movie writing approach to games writing - when I read a preview or set visit or interview with an actor/director/etc., no journalist is writing about how fricking awesome the movie is going to be - because they have not SEEN it yet.

Best wishes,
- Roland

 

[robur]

Previews, I think, often come off sounding as hyperbolic when, say, you weren't offered anything negative to talk about and no one will answer questions otherwise. My recent Bioshock preview, on the otherhand, is unabashedly positive. I've seen enough games 3 months from release to be able to see that Bioshock has a real shot at being not just good, but stunning. Even then, though, potential issues were still raised. I'll also note that just about all GameSpy previews make clear when we get actual hands-on, some screens and a speech, or what.

I think game-writing as movie-writing is an interesting idea, but is it tenable? Look at how much actually gets released about a movie before it's released -- very little, and most of it fluff.

Let me ask you and everybody else another question: why is it that there are sometimes as many as three, four previews of one game before it finally sees its release day? Why not run it like the film business, doing one article on it 3-6 months before it gets released and then maybe another one when you can actually put your hands on playable code a.k.a. a first screening of a few scenes?

I believe that the onslaught of previews is deemed to create a hype that can only disappoint - and does a game that has five previews in one magazine really sell more than one that has only one or two?

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

I believe that the onslaught of previews is deemed to create a hype that can only disappoint - and does a game that has five previews in one magazine really sell more than one that has only one or two?

I believe it is the awfully written content in said previews that creates the hype. There is never a negative word spoken in the previews or any critical analysis. If "gaming journalists" would be a little more critical, hype might not be a problem. For a good preview example, check out the one recently done on Depth of Peril, on this very site. VD was critical where he needed to be and analyzed the shortcomings. And he's not a paid professional, yet has more tact and class than most that do. Funny huh?