Editorial RPG Codex Editorial: Games Journalism Scandal

[almondblight]

But they have posted about it since.

Yeah, why? "We’re posting about this story now not because any new developments have occurred, but because it seems not posting about it was causing us more accusations than we can stand to listen to."

After claiming that people who accused them were conspiracy theorists that didn't understand that dating websites for gamers is about gaming, rampant corruption in game journalism - not so much.

 

[felipepepe]

No kiddin man, Kotaku is still not 100% back online from the hurricane and they already did 4 Halo 4 newspost TODAY.

 

[7hm]

But they have posted about it since.

Yeah, why? "We’re posting about this story now not because any new developments have occurred, but because it seems not posting about it was causing us more accusations than we can stand to listen to."

After claiming that people who accused them were conspiracy theorists that didn't understand that dating websites for gamers is about gaming, rampant corruption in game journalism - not so much.

RPS never responds to this stuff. They're not journalists, as far as I can tell. They do a base level of consumer advocacy, they promote games that interest them, and they push their social / political causes. They also repost rumours without verifying them (the recent DOTA piece had a pretty major factual error). I read RPS, but take their stuff with a grain of salt. (The entire philosophy that Kieren was pushing of "New Games Journalism" had nothing to do with journalism, and everything to do with better, more entertaining writing. I am ok with reading websites dedicated to the latter; I wish there were some dedicated to the former.)

 

[Vendigroth]

No kiddin man, Kotaku is still not 100% back online from the hurricane and they already did 4 Halo 4 newspost TODAY.

One of the kotaku guys over at NeoGaf is trying his damndest to fight off any and all criticism towards the industry.

His latest post about "that's just a forum post, it should be taken with a grain of salt", seems kind of ridiculous in insinuating that we should hold off until -- wait for it -- gaming journalists tackle this difficult topic. Hilarity.

 

[Jaesun]

RPS's Articles speak for themselves. It's not rocket science. Like when they jumped on the OMG!!! NEW VEGAS HAS BUGS!!! OMG! WHAT A SHIT GAEM!! They NEVER bring this shit up on any Bethesda game (or solely focus on it). If I am recalling the correct website. They all are shit, it can't tell them apart.

 

[Vendigroth]

RPS's Articles speak for themselves. It's not rocket science. Like when they jumped on the OMG!!! NEW VEGAS HAS BUGS!!! OMG! WHAT A SHIT GAEM!! They NEVER bring this shit up on any Bethesda game (or solely focus on it). If I am recalling the correct website. They all are shit, it can't tell them apart.

How big was the New Vegas advertising campaign? Surely it was insignificant relative to the FO3/Skyrim/Oblivion wave. That could have a lot to do with it, obviously.

Not to mention the "fanboy" element. Give a poor enough review to their favorite games and watch how quickly they cause a shitstorm and/or no longer use you as a source for reviews. Every mainstream review is a piggyback of the next on AAA titles.

 

[almondblight]

They're not journalists, as far as I can tell.

Yeah, but isn't that the point of all this? None of these people are journalists, and none of them have any journalistic standards? They're happy to talk about Roger Ebert, but rampant corruption in the industry isn't important.

Anyway, my main point was Florence making vague statements about editors calling fans paranoid doesn't mean much when he's willing to tell you how great his friends are that do the same damn thing.

 

[Brother None]

I do like Rock Paper Shotgun. But that blog is all about good writing and readable reviews, not being informative, journalistic or even precisely factual. They do what they do very well, but in attitude towards journalism they're really no that different from Destructoid or Kotaku. Just run by better people.

Anyway, my main point was Florence making vague statements about editors calling fans paranoid doesn't mean much when he's willing to tell you how great his friends are that do the same damn thing.

He doesn't seem to be that willing to name names. Somewhat understandable.

We should have a website just dedicated to researching the shills. This Lauren Wainwright story got a lot more interesting than it originally seemed. So much for Walker trying to represent her as someone who "just made a mistake".

 

[Machocruz]

RPS's Articles speak for themselves. It's not rocket science. Like when they jumped on the OMG!!! NEW VEGAS HAS BUGS!!! OMG! WHAT A SHIT GAEM!! They NEVER bring this shit up on any Bethesda game (or solely focus on it). If I am recalling the correct website. They all are shit, it can't tell them apart.

If tommorow I tell the audience that, like. an Obsidian game has bugs, nobody panics because it's all part of the plan. But when I say that one little old Bethesda game has as many bugs, well then everyone loses their minds!

Bethesda is a sacred cow now. We can't undermine them by saying Obsidian made the better Fallout RPG, cause you know, Fallout 3 is one of the best gaymes evar. So we declare that the differences between the two games are merely cosmetic, except for the bugs that "plague New Vegas," making that the lesser of the two and maintaining Bethesda's secure position.

This is a common pattern whenever doubt starts to creep into the audience. Trash another game at the expense of the game you want to promote. They use this method to sell the game by saying "Hey, this shit right here, it's better than that shit that used to be the shit, or any similar shit that came out recently. That'll be $60 please. The rest of the game will be availabe in DLC releases at a convenient price." Or something like that.

You'll see, I'll show you, when the Kickstarter games start coming out. They're already setting it up. I've seen a few articles questioning the validity of patterning new games after old games. If there is any threat to the established order of popamole RPG domination, the mob will be ready to quell any murmurs of descent with 7s and 3/5s.

You know, they're schemers. Schemers trying to control their little worlds.

 

[7hm]

They're not journalists, as far as I can tell.

Yeah, but isn't that the point of all this? None of these people are journalists, and none of them have any journalistic standards? They're happy to talk about Roger Ebert, but rampant corruption in the industry isn't important.

Sadly... yeah I don't think many (any?) of them are. John Walker would like to be, but he doesn't seem to get that the purpose behind codes of ethics or professional standards. He seems to think people can just sort it out themselves if they have good intentions. He also has to deal with British libel laws, which are a real consideration. And he doesn't want to say bad stuff about friends, or at least that's what I assume is the reason behind not touching this stuff with a ten foot pole.

I'm really curious - are there any actual journalists? People who don't take free stuff, who don't just report press releases, and who do actual investigative journalism? (Also I realise investigatve journalism is not the entire profession, but its the part that's missing.)

 

[tuluse]

I'm really curious - are there any actual journalists? People who don't take free stuff, who don't just report press releases, and who do actual investigative journalism? (Also I realise investigatve journalism is not the entire profession, but its the part that's missing.)

Yes there are, but these people usually have a cause and it's never inclining video games.

 

[Gozma]

I don't actually care about improving game journalism, although I guess separating the critical apparatus from the PR apparatus would likely not make things worse. Although everything is so entropic maybe it would. But what I mostly want is to see duplicitous twitter fuckers writhe around on a pin through their guts 'cause they live in a humiliating system where they gargle shit to make other people real money

 

[Balor]

At the end of the day, that's why the soft corruption you see in the game industry is the most effective form, as it relies on inherent human traits which we generally view as positive; the journalist feels grateful to the publicist for their generosity or feels a warm regard for someone they view as a colleague, and, consequently, they will feel disloyal or ungrateful if they are "too harsh". So their review is mealy-mouthed for the same reason you tell your friend their hair looks better a different way, rather than just saying they look like shit; their capacity for objectivity has been sabotaged by their virtues.

THIS. I've been thinking about that, but I lack ability to put it so eloquently.
Anyway, this is BEST case scenario. Worst case is where they EXPECT to be showered with gifts and will spitefully lower the scores of any game that fails to. And it will eventially come to that - this is just human mentality at work. And all this would happen under a blanket of self-delusion, so they would HONESTLY be affronted by any mention of any mention of corruption. Human capacity for self-delusion is truly astounding.

 

[Balor]

And about "real" journalists. Real journalists would have to be payed REAL wages, that do not come from game publishers in any shape or form. They will have to educated and work fulltime. They will not content with 'free games' and 'getting to conventions' (that's the whole point). This will not be cheap.
It instantly leaves out any mag that runs on ad revenue. You will have to have a subscription fee. And you know? Most players do not really WANT objective game coverage. They made up their minds beforehand, hooked up by hype. They do not want to be disappointed, have their hopes crushed. And when they buy it, they would hate to see the king 'laid bare', they would would defend their choice not to feel stupid about buying it.
So, unfortunately, prospects of having objective mainstream gaming press are very, very slim. Unless you are prepared to pay a yearly fee of a 1000$ or so, I guess.

 

[Infinitron]

And about "real" journalists. Real journalists would have to be payed REAL wages, that do not come from game publishers in any shape or form. They will have to educated and work fulltime. They will not content with 'free games' and 'getting to conventions' (that's the whole point). This will not be cheap.
It instantly leaves out any mag that runs on ad revenue. You will have to have a subscription fee. And you know? Most players do not really WANT objective game coverage. They made up their minds beforehand, hooked up by hype. They do not want to be disappointed, have their hopes crushed. And when they buy it, they would hate to see the king 'laid bare', they would would defend their choice not to feel stupid about buying it.
So, unfortunately, prospects of having objective mainstream gaming press are very, very slim. Unless you are prepared to pay a yearly fee of a 1000$ or so, I guess.

There are two options for "real gaming journalism" that I can see.

1) Primarily non-gaming publications with game journalism sections, that don't rely on publisher advertising.
2) Wealthy hobbyists and/or part-timers, who don't need ads at all.

 

[7hm]

I'm really curious - are there any actual journalists? People who don't take free stuff, who don't just report press releases, and who do actual investigative journalism? (Also I realise investigatve journalism is not the entire profession, but its the part that's missing.)

Yes there are, but these people usually have a cause and it's never inclining video games.

Who?

I don't see much investigative journalism from the people pushing causes. I see a lot of editorials dissecting games (which, I'm assuming, were in many cases free review copies).

There was that woman who kickstarted her video doc. I guess that would qualify, though a bit more in the Michael Moore style of journalism (ie. not).

There have also been some real pieces on this scandal. The one Jaesun linked upthread, from wosland, was the best gaming journalism I've read in a long time.

And about "real" journalists. Real journalists would have to be payed REAL wages, that do not come from game publishers in any shape or form. They will have to educated and work fulltime. They will not content with 'free games' and 'getting to conventions' (that's the whole point). This will not be cheap.
It instantly leaves out any mag that runs on ad revenue. You will have to have a subscription fee. And you know? Most players do not really WANT objective game coverage. They made up their minds beforehand, hooked up by hype. They do not want to be disappointed, have their hopes crushed. And when they buy it, they would hate to see the king 'laid bare', they would would defend their choice not to feel stupid about buying it.
So, unfortunately, prospects of having objective mainstream gaming press are very, very slim. Unless you are prepared to pay a yearly fee of a 1000$ or so, I guess.

Newspapers charge subscriptions, but a huge source of their income is advertisment. That doesn't mean that the people they employ aren't real journalists.
The problem with gaming mags isn't that they depend on ad revenue, it's that they aren't able to diversify the source of their ad revenue. You would think that companies that aren't directly involved in making / publishing games would be interested in tapping into the target market of these gaming mags. Male, young adult, fair amount of discretionary income. It's surprising that the more traditional advertisers never really glommed onto gaming mags. People who read video game magazines also buy clothes, food, liquour, etc. Yet you never see these things being advertised - everything is always game related (either the games themselves, some venue to play the games, or hardware / software that improves the game playing experience). Doesn't make a lot of sense. (This applies to websites as well as mags, obviously.)

 

[Menckenstein]

Reminds me of the scandal with motorcycle magazines like Cycle World / Motorcyclist being held hostage by Arai (Japanese helmet company) over the Snell ratings thing. The US DOT has its own safety standards for helmets and many states require by law that you wear a DOT approved helmet while riding and then there's the Snell Foundation who have their own standards which were always assumed to be above & beyond the DOT standard.

Turns out that the Snell rating only really applied to initial impact and the fact of the matter is in a wreck where your helmet hits once, it's gonna hit two, three, four, five (and beyond) times and the Snell rated helmets were basically a halloween candy bucket after that initial impact (hyperbole). Arai is big on the fact that they adhere to THE MIGHTY SNELL STANDARD and when this news was breaking Arai PR and even American executives for the company went around trying to smooth it over and have them hold back the articles until the new rating was established & their helmets were on the market, like late reviews for game scores under 80 or w/e. A couple of blogs broke the news about the Snell shit and then later it came out that Arai had basically said "We are 45% of the ads in your magazines, if you run this we will pull our advertising and drown you" to any magazine who wanted to show the least bit of integrity.

RIDER SAFETY FIRST... oh no my jewgolds pls no.

edit: Seems I screwed up some of the details because someone writing for Motorcyclist did publish an article on it, the blogs were the ones who broke the news about him being thrown under the bus.

http://mispeed.net/2011/11/money-secrets-lies-and-the-death-of-a-journalists-career/

 

[Taluntain]

This entire business (at least in the US/UK and probably most major countries) relies on chummy advertising revenue from "trusted publishers/partners" and free perks and bonuses, so anyone who's now saying that they suddenly won't have any of it any more... well, heh, we'll see about that as they're basically saying that they'll be taking a voluntary hit to their monthly revenue plus a big dis-incentive to every member of the staff who'll now be left only with a low/mediocre pay sans the "traditional perks", which was probably the only thing that made it worth selling themselves for for a large number of them. I'm sure that's going to go down well...

 

[Cowboy Moment]

http://updates.kotaku.com/post/34775753950/how-it-feels-to-review-halo-4-on-microsofts-turf

This is an awesome article, because it beautifully demonstrates the entire process: how publishers try to influence reviewers, why it's so effective, and the self-delusion that allows said reviewers to believe they're not being influenced in any way. I can read it, and easily spot the bias in the text itself, just from the way the author describes certain events. However, the author herself has carefully examined her own mindset, and found it perfectly objective and impartial; she even wrote about this in the article itself!

Should archive for posterity's sake and link it in any discussing revolving around gaming journalist objectivity.

 

[Jaesun]

Exactly! Well said sir.

 

[Monk]

Star Wars?!

 

[TheWesDude]

the only way to fix the gaming journalisim industry is to move away from overall scores/grades and to move to a breakdown system.

for each genre there should be criteria with games that are tops in that criteria and then judge all games based on that with weighted scores.

fps:
engine 20%
graphics/art 20%
story 10%
multi-player 20%
bugs 15%
weapon diversity 15%

RPG
story 25%
engine 20%
graphics/art 10%
bugs 15%
character progression/levelling 20%
quest design 10%


now what i mean by like weapon diversity is if you have a shotgun, pistol, sniper gun, AR, RPG... you get say 5/10. games at the top of the weapon diversity i would say would be duke nukem for their multiple "inventive" weapons and also Rise of the Triad for their multitude of awesome weapons. a gun that shoots out a FLAME WALL!!! those games would be 10/10 in my book.

if your RPG is mostly fetch/kill quests, you get 3-4/10.

if your engine has problems with like art assets popping out or glitches like hangs or such, 5-6/10.

if your art/graphics are coherent and work well ESPECIALLY when you turn off all the extra stuff like AA and bloom and such, and look good with them on, you get 10/10. if stuff looks like crap without AA or bloom, much lower.

until we see a progression into this area, gaming journalisim isnt worth crap.

 

[Jaesun]

https://twitter.com/BenKuchera

Awesome, the new issue of MCV features a Lauren Wainwright-penned preview of a Square Enix game. Seems legit.

Even better, the article plays up the Sniper Challenge, which Intent Media used as a contest, sponsored by Square Enix. No disclosure.

(Wainwright's boyfriend was one of the finalists, but don't worry, he didn't win.) This story keeps on giving.

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

https://twitter.com/BenKuchera

This story keeps on giving.

Its amazing, this is just one rock that was turned over, almost at random, and look how much has crawled out. I think this is probably the only incident in which the probing has gone this deep (as far as I'm aware), so I can't imagine what would happen if the internet hordes were to descend upon all gaming journalists in this way.

Perhaps a catalog of shills is in order? (an example of this would be http://shameproject.com/)

 

[grotsnik]

Perhaps a catalog of shills is in order? (an example of this would be http://shameproject.com/)

When that IGN Halo 4 review turned up, I did think of the column Variety used to run that named and shamed the most cringeworthy examples of suspiciously-unqualified praise used by movie critics that year.