Totally Not Corrupt Professional Objective Gaming Journalism DRAMA

[Taxnomore]

There is something inherently wrong with your journalism if you are some kind of celebrity or rock star. It's not your fucking job.

 

[dnf]

When he's writing BS all he gets is praise. When he writes the truth all he gets is

Paradoxes of modern gaming journalism.

There is no paradox since his audience are fed up lies in the first place.

 

[felipepepe]

Infinitron posted this because he wants money for this Codex newposting. :3

 

[AN4RCHID]

jschreier wrote a thing on NeoGAF about game previews. Somewhat relevant to Codex interests as he takes a potshot at Obsidian's silly press demo thing.

OK I suppose I should chime in here, as per OP's request.

The PlayStation Blog, Xbox Wire, and even Nintendo's Treehouse streams are illustrating something very important: previews in video game magazines and websites are obsolete. Their total demise hasn't happened yet, and it might not happen for a while, but it will, and though the transition might be painful for media outlets that can't adapt, it will ultimately be more beneficial for both writers and readers. In general, the video game press has made some great strides over the past couple of decades -- I mean, seriously, check out some old editions of EGM -- but there's still a lot of progress to be made in terms of ditching PR-mandated news cycles and finding more interesting stories and things to say about games.

Writers for game media outlets are used to covering games in a very specific way. Say Activision announces a new Call of Duty game. First there's an announcement, and everyone jumps to cover that. Then there's a trailer. Maybe some screenshots. Interview opportunities, where reporters will talk to PR-trained developers and turn their quotes into stories with headlines like "New Call of Duty will have double the polygons of the last one, developer says." Then there will be hands-off previews, followed by hands-on previews, all based on vertical slices shown at PR events with free sandwiches and sometimes even beer. Eventually, there's a review. Then it's on to the Next Big Game.

We do this because this is How It's Always Been, and because readers are hungry for information about exciting new video games. But by participating in this cycle, we're nothing but middle-men, reliant upon access to publishers and developers so we can tell everyone what we think of How Their Games Are Shaping Up So Far. This is not very interesting, and ultimately turns press into what many cynical readers describe as "extensions of marketing." Publishers mandate these vertical slices so press will write about them and convince readers to pre-order games, and the press deliver, because their readers want to know what's happening in the world of gaming. Sure, sometimes a rogue writer will dare to note that something feels off about a preview build, but there's always the caveat that "the game is unfinished" and "anything can change," which ultimately doesn't help readers all that much.

But we still do it.

Yet... over the past few years, the landscape has changed: publishers have started running their own versions of media outlets, with their own video channels, streams, and blogs. Instead of solely directing people to IGN and GameSpot, companies like Sony have hired their own writers -- most of whom have worked in games journalism -- to publish information about PlayStation games on their own blog.

The scary thing? Some of those previews could be published on any gaming site and nobody would know the difference. What's more, it's hard to tell whether people would care. There's already an unhealthy amount of mistrust for the gaming press -- how many readers are really going to care whether the preview they're reading is on the PlayStation Blog or IGN? If the preview is just regurgitating information or hyping up a cool new game, what's the difference to readers? Isn't it marketing either way?

More importantly, is it really all that beneficial for readers when we keep doing this? Are we really serving our audience by participating in this cycle? You could certainly make the argument that part of being a journalist in any field is disseminating information from the companies you cover, whether that's EA or the White House, but why even bother rewriting press releases when you can just show readers the originals? It's an antiquated way of thinking. I saw a 30-minute demo of Pillars of Eternity at E3, for example, and wrote up some thoughts and info for my readers -- the game looks awesome! -- but wouldn't it have been more beneficial to those readers if they could just see that demo directly?

Meanwhile, there's so much other stuff in gaming worth our attention, from crazy SGDQ speedrunning to Watch Dogs E3 code to troubles at Crytek. The PR hype cycle feels less and less relevant every day, and I imagine that in the future, gaming sites will ditch preview and PR-based coverage in favor of real stories about far more interesting things. Let the PlayStation Blog handle PlayStation news.

 

[tuluse]

It's like that thing Grunker was talking about.

 

[deuxhero]

If gaming "journalism" wasn't already 99+% regurgitating press releases, I'd give a damn.

It says a lot about the state of game "journalism" when information directly from the company is more worthwhile.

 

[Grunker]

It's like that thing Grunker was talking about.

To be fair, Kotaku made the same point (sort of) before me. They basically said "we think previews are shit because xyz, but we're going to keep bringing them." Don't know what's worse. Ignorance or continuation despite awareness.

 

[tuluse]

To be fair, Kotaku made the same point (sort of) before me. They basically said "we think previews are shit because xyz, but we're going to keep bringing them." Don't know what's worse. Ignorance or continuation despite awareness.

Isn't this the guy who took special umbrage at your article about video game trade shows?

 

[Major_Blackhart]

So somebody tell me, have they gotten on video the journalists accepting bribes with the phrase God is a superstition?

 

[DalekFlay]

I stopped reading previews years ago. I barely even participate in threads for unreleased games, because until a game comes out I don't really care much. Initial screenshots get a look, maybe a bullet-point rundown, that's it. I just check out new RPGs as they come out in a couple youtube vids, read some forum reaction, then buy when the price looks right. It's not complicated.

 

[Angthoron]

Well, from such unimportant crap as previews and gaming news in general, the gaming media may finally shift into the social sphere, to fight to good fight against inequalities, promote minorities and feminist agenda.

Although yeah, stopped reading previews way too many years ago to even recall when it actually happened. It's just a bullet point list masked by verbal diarrhea.

 

[Dim]

Fight BS ratings by only caring about yourmetascoretm generated by this spreadsheet I made. Its a metascore but you pick which publications matter.

 

[Grim Monk]

Skip to 1:30

 

[Ninjerk]

Does GT make independent trailers?

 

[Jaedar]

Does GT make independent trailers?

Not really. They do make some 'original' content in the form of reviews and top 10 lists and so on.

 

[Ninjerk]

Does GT make independent trailers?

Not really. They do make some 'original' content in the form of reviews and top 10 lists and so on.

So....... basically the moron was dead on. They provide nothing that someone else couldn't provide (ie. hosting trailers made by the developer/publisher(s) whose cost is included in the price of the game, softball 7-10/10 AAA reviews, and so-generic-they're-pointless lists). Am I wrong here?

 

[Jaedar]

Does GT make independent trailers?

Not really. They do make some 'original' content in the form of reviews and top 10 lists and so on.

So....... basically the moron was dead on. They provide nothing that someone else couldn't provide (ie. hosting trailers made by the developer/publisher(s) whose cost is included in the price of the game, softball 7-10/10 AAA reviews, and so-generic-they're-pointless lists). Am I wrong here?

Nope, you're pretty much right. They're basically a generic gaming vidya review site except they use video instead of text.

 

[7/10]

Fight BS ratings by only caring about yourmetascoretm generated by this spreadsheet I made. Its a metascore but you pick which publications matter.

The spreadsheet is broken in Excel 2010. Get a real office suite next time.

 

[Angthoron]

Skip to 1:30

Fucketh me, I was fooled into clicking on a video with Pachter in it.

 

[Black_Willow]

returded vidya

Oh LOL, that entitled white cis privilaged male.
Why provide people with some unique content good enough to actually pay for it? Let's make a youtube video where we call someone an 'idiot' instead.

 

[Dim]

The spreadsheet is broken in Excel 2010. Get a real office suite next time.

Wanna donate to my kickstarter to buy me Excel or would you rather support FOSS? Could not open xlsx in anything had to convert to csv. 6mb in cvs : 112mb in xlsx.

 

[Cadmus]

Skip to 1:30

Fucketh me, I was fooled into clicking on a video with Pachter in it.

I watched just the adblock part and couldnt tell if the video was a parody or not. Who is Pachter or wtf? Is it a joke video or for real? Cuz if its for real its the most retarded thing ever. The whole point the mail was making was that the shitty trailer website provides no service thus theres no reason to support them. ALl they do is rehost bullshit PR videos and such and I dont even care to find out if its true. I havent been on any gaming website for years cuz its pointless

 

[sea]

Does GT make independent trailers?

GameTrailers makes podcasts/vlogs, interview content and cover major press events, previews, reviews, editorials, and so on - basically everything you get out of a site like IGN but without the written stuff. I'd say GameTrailers provides a service to a market given its user community and the fact that it's been around as long as they have (2006ish?). Whether or not you value that coverage, I think the fact that it is still around shows there must be people out there who like the site and the content it produces.

In other words, though the trailers get people to visit, much like IGN, GameSpot, etc., it has a dedicated viewership which enjoys the additional content and community. That is as much the selling point (if not far more) than the trailers themselves.

Pachter did sort of make a point there that's worth repeating - if you want to go watch the stuff on YouTube, YouTube is there. But, if you want the kind of content that sites like GT provide, well, that's why they exist.

 

[Dr Tomo]

Does GT make independent trailers?

I'd say GameTrailers provides a service to a market given its user community and the fact that it's been around as long as they have (2006ish?). Whether or not you value that coverage, I think the fact that it is still around shows there must be people out there who like the site and the content it produces.

Uh actually that is false, they have been going down the shitter like all "video game news" sites. (gamesutra link) Not enough people value their coverage if Viacom dropped them fast.

Newsbrief:

Multiple employees of video game broadcast outlet GameTrailers are reporting that they've been laid off today in the wake of the company's acquisition by Defy Media.

On Monday Viacom announced that it was selling GameTrailers, Addicting Games and Shockwave to Defy Media in return for a minority equity stake in the company. Defy already operates a number of online media properties, including Screen Junkies and The Escapist.

Variety reports that roughly 20 people were expected to make the transition from Viacom to Defy, and today it seems that those who weren't part of the deal have received termination notices -- often as they were preparing to decamp from a week of covering E3 in Los Angeles.

Polygon cites unnamed sources who claim over half of the full-time GameTrailers employees have lost their jobs this week. Among them was departing GameTrailers producer Jeremy Hoffmann, and we've taken the liberty of republishing his Twitter update below.

Gamasutra has reached out to Viacom and Defy Media for more information on the intent and scope of the layoffs, and we'll keep you apprised of any meaningful response.

My 10th #E3 complete, Friday the 13th and just got laid off from @Gametrailers http://t.co/X29fQpfgtT

— Cheezus (@hofftv) June 13, 2014

https://twitter.com/hofftv/statuses/477531878031765504

 

[Cadmus]

Pachter did sort of make a point there that's worth repeating - if you want to go watch the stuff on YouTube, YouTube is there. But, if you want the kind of content that sites like GT provide, well, that's why they exist.

This is really not a point, it's stating the obvious "if you like GT's content, you should watch them". If I remember correctly, the letter in the video said "why the fuck should I watch the ad-infested shit site that is GT when I can use youtube for the same thing" and the answer was offtopic "they make content you are a scum for using ADblock"

Can you tell me whether the video is real or parody? I don't want to watch the whole thing