VentilatorOfDoom said:
VentilatorOfDoom, my bro... The point I was driving at here was that from purely journalistic view your article did not exhibit high enough standard, in spite of what some other Codexers my think they are. Believe me, this is not the kind of interview I would like to read in some hypothetically good gaming mag (if it existed).
As I said before, the problem with it is that in the course of the interview I lost the thing crucial for a good article - impartial voice. I know in this day and age with bloated mass media we have the concept might strike as alien. It seems that nowadays 'journalists' have some hidden agenda in their articles - they want to prove their point and they use every means possible to achieve that. It often appears that they do so completely unknowingly to themselves. There are those among them who will resort to 'cocksucking'. There are others who will attempt to talk down their speaker into submission.
Granted, as you say, it is impossible for an individual to completely abstract himself from his views. However, in a good review/interview/essay some sort of removal of one's own ideas is necessary if only because the journalist mediates between the community and his speaker. The tone he uses, the manners speak volumes to the interviewee about the type of audience the article is being written for. As such, he by default represents something larger than himself. It is unfair, therefore, when his own strong emotions cloud the goal he wants to achieve - to inform the community about the product, all its features, good and bad. It is unfair because no matter what answer the intrlocutor will give it will be always affected by your own biased viewpoint - whether it is 'herp derp' or 'bark bark'. This may please some of your audience, but at the same time it does nothing to faciliate communication, it does not go in depth about the info I wanted to receive. Moreover, it sent your speaker the message what a bunch of bitter cunts we are.
It also pays to remember that your speaker is not some evil mastermind bent on brainwashing you and your readers. He is just a PR guy, maybe a swell fellow after work, who wants to promote his product. It is good thing that you didn't let him shamelesly advertise the game for free. It isn't quite so wonderful that you tried to deride him for God knows what.
I know what you attempted to do here - "Aggressive journalism". This is arguably the most difficult form of journalism to dabble in and most easy to botch - look at the Sun, Daily Express and other gutter press. The whole point of this method is to get the truth from the speaker through a series of accurate, precise, detailed questions showing the interviewer's knowledge about the subject, his contemplation, and preparation for the talk without being pigheaded about it. No hate-speak required. Because you are interested in facts you want the speaker to answer them. You attempt to provide context for your questions - that's splendid! The only problem is the context does little to help your speaker to answer them - it seems to be created to ridicule him.
An example is in order
The Witcher 2 you're going the button-mashing route. Is that true?
Again, this was very pejorative, very slighting thing to say for a PR guy who almost in each and every interview attempts to stress 'tactical', 'not dumbed down' nature of the new combat. To me it seemed that you negated everything Gop commented on in plethora interviews I happened to follow (In before TWitcher fanboy - I follow all the interviews on any RPG I can find).
Now I learned that you used another article as the basis for your question. Very good... But don't you think you should have informed him and us about the reason you chose this expression? Short clarification would help:
The Witcher 2 you're going the button-mashing route. After all, in your October 2010 (sic!) interview for Gambanshee you claimed that in The Witcher 2 you can, let me quote: just mash your button and you will swipe through the combat if you want to. This rises some concerns about the quality of the combat system. Is that true?
It sends everyone a clear message that you are prepared, professional journalist. It also lets Tomek know the reason behind your rationale - It is not you having 'an impression' you got from somewhere. Now your accusation actually has grounds in what Gop said himself. That other interview was long time ago, he (and us) might not associate the 'button-mashing' with his own words. Now that the tables are turned, he understands you are not being a dick, you are just acting upon legit info so he can clarify that statement he made some 6 months ago by repeating what he did in numerous other interviews - button-mashing will be for easy difficulty only.
VentilatorOfDoom. Bro. I am not writing this to deride your effort. I must say there are bits in the article where you exhibit a fine degree of expertise. You certainly are familiar with the subject matter, your questions are accurate (pity most of them appeared elsewhere), your concerns are valid. There's great deal of fine craftsmanship out there in your interview. It's just you achieve only fraction of what you could have by allowing Codexian mindset to impact your writing. If it were me, a fellow Codexer being interviewed by you I could play along and attempt trolling of my own. However, because your speaker was also an outsider, your guest, with the position in industry that rules out fooling about, who you invited for a talk you do him great disservice by applying unprofessional, mocking, slightly immature manners to what ought to be impartial, informative interview.
Thank you for your time and work for us. I know your next endeavours will show improvement. I trust that one day the Codex will really become a shining example of what true gaming journalism should really look like.
fanboy faggotry at its best
.
