CamHostage
Member
But the games journalism industry isn't exactly the pinnacle of ethics.
But games journalism is also not the dregs of anti-consumer shilling either. Shitting on the people you're asking to join in on talk about a thought makes them just want to avoid getting shit on.
I think the fight against complaints on journalism from journalists comes from knowing that credit is hardly ever given for getting the job done, and the few public instances of breakdowns in policy (a number of which have been breakdowns in management rather than a specific journalist abusing his position) have smeared a business that has striven to be open and honest and professional (despite market conditions that have made such an approach to be less and less financially lucrative over the years.)
...some of us have moderate opinions that publishers spend the money on press kits so as to create an overall more positive impression of their game which, as humans, inevitably causes some sort of unconscious bias that we cannot control. One might also imply that this is not akin to corruption, but obviously the reason companies put in the effort to do these things in the first place.
But let's not talk about reasonable middlegrounds, there's no place for that here. It's just journalists getting hurt that anyone could believe they are susceptible to regular human biases, and others crying about the corrupt capitalist influence of materialistic press kits on the media proletariat.
Yep, it is difficult to have an honest conversation. Unconscious influence is a real factor that journalists naturally have to contend with, and talking about it actually bubbles up awareness of its effects on both sides. Unfortunately, since so many think that journalists are dirty, mooching bottom-feeders and because journalists think they're fighting for their lives to get any story actually read, we cannot have a direct and even-handed conversation about it. Each believes that one side is all wrong, one side is all right, and no progress gets made.
Literally all marketing for a game, which game journalists are subjected to day in and day out as part of their job, is designed to influence your opinion of it. That is, indeed, the entire point of marketing. Press kits are no more bribery than the early previews journos get to play before consumers, or whatever dumb swag they throw in to an E3 bag. Any game journalist worth a damn is utterly desensitized to it because they are bombarded with it at all times to the point of it becoming routine.
And I think the question journalists would have is, what can I do about it other than do my job? Journalists didn't ask for these press packages, and it's not like they'll go, "What, no fancy pack-in book? Screw you Uncharted, you get a 2!" It's part of the job that shit shows up at your desk, some of it is good shit and some of it goes right in the trash. You can set firewall principles up and tell publishers that you will not accept anything but a disc or code, or you can use that time spent arguing and mailing shit back to just pull out the disc/code and go do your job, maybe play with some of the tchotchke when you're all done with work.
Either way, there is no way to be entirely "objective" of the surrounding hype for a game if you love gaming. Myself, I will never be professionally reviewing The Last Guardian or have any connection to its development, yet even I as a consumer have an emotional connection to this project and designer Ueda and all the history behind it. I'd think you had a screw loose if you looked at FF XV and SteinsGate on the new release chart and thought they were equally impactful game releases. You'd be bad at your job as a journalist if you were surprised to see a game manufacturer put a ton of PR effort into a big game.
There is no objectivity. There is only discipline in seeing what really matters, which is the game that you or somebody else will have to spend $60 on.