[Muffdraul]

To me, this all comes down to the real problem- sometimes, developers announce their upcoming games way, way too early. IMO they should wait until the thing is virtually finished and in beta testing, nail down a release date, announce it to the public, do a few months of marketing, and put the damn thing into our hands. If they want to be super secretive about the details prior to release, fine. That's not so bad when the wait is only six months.

[-Pyromaniac-]

To me, this all comes down to the real problem- sometimes, developers announce their upcoming games way, way too early. IMO they should wait until the thing is virtually finished and in beta testing, nail down a release date, announce it to the public, do a few months of marketing, and put the damn thing into our hands. If they want to be super secretive about the details prior to release, fine. That's not so bad when the wait is only six months.

there's nothing wrong with announcing anything early. That's a good thing. That's a good start. It's the follow-up that sucks. They announce it early and then pretend it doesn't exist for many stretches of time until release. Instead of PR working so hard to keep info hidden, why not give regular updates on how things are going, etc...let everyone know things are progressing. Drop a picture when you can, a teaser video when you can, etc...

[Fantastical]

You could have not posted anything!

Don't you see what's wrong with this though? You don't report on a rumor from a seemingly credible source if the company it is about says "no comment". Then there would cease to be rumors anymore in this secretive industry. Not to mention the question was about the existence of a game and they couldn't even answer it.

I don't really see this as damage control as much as just general frustration. When a.company won't confirm the existence of a game announced at the beginning of the generation there is reason to be suspicious.

[APZonerunner]

Don't you see what's wrong with this though? You don't report on a rumor from a seemingly credible source if the company it is about says "no comment". Then there would cease to be rumors anymore in this secretive industry. Not to mention the question was about the existence of a game and they couldn't even answer it. I don't really see this as damage control as much as just general frustration. When a.company won't confirm the existence of a game announced at the beginning of the generation there is reason to be suspicious.

Yep.

[jschreier]

Don't you see what's wrong with this though? You don't report on a rumor from a seemingly credible source if the company it is about says "no comment". Then there would cease to be rumors anymore in this secretive industry. Not to mention the question was about the existence of a game and they couldn't even answer it. I don't really see this as damage control as much as just general frustration. When a.company won't confirm the existence of a game announced at the beginning of the generation there is reason to be suspicious.

Exactly. I think it's frustrating for many gamers when companies dismiss us like that, and it's a large part of what has created this "us vs. them" mentality that seems to be so prevalent these days.

[wondermega]

Gaming journalism can easily make or break a game, even a company at this point. It has happened repeatedly and is often met with a resounding "oh well, isn't that a shame then." Developer/publisher silence is simply one if the biggest problems "for them" (journos) but certainly not for the industry as a whole.

As for 38 studios fiasco, I dont see how they could have done anything different, you're damn straight it is in their best interest to keep tight-lipped until the last minute. If they had handled things better they might gave had some chance to sell their studio/assets/IP and keep development going. Obviously in that particular case it could never be, but in a similar situation it's far from unheard of. Of course given the circumstances it's far easier to take advantage of a dramatic situation and get easy clicks out of it for journos (hell, who doesn't wanna watch a 20-car-pileup? I'm there too!) Come to think of it, this is almost a bad example from any angle, although in more "respectable" cases it's been handled with far more dignity (ATVI/vivendi unloading double fine, terminal reality games, etc) and with generally more favorable conclusions.

So long as game development is still such a giant cluster-f of an industry with so much riding on pure speculation, fanboyism and double-talk, it is absolutely in their best interest to control/skew PR as much as possible and deal with the bigger issues (building the game properly and maintaining community support in spite of potential drama in the shark-infested waters of journalism)

[Kenshin001]

Do you really think Kotaku published that story thinking "this sure is false" or "hey we'd better make things up so Square Enix responds"? We'd never intentionally lie to our readers. Did you even read the story? Brian made it quite clear that he couldn't verify everything. He also explored several possibilities, including one that still might be true: FFVersusXIII could have very well morphed into FFXV.

Did he actually talk to a source at SE? I imagine he doesn't have any. Ask Brian if he has any sources at SE.

[Htown]

The gaming industry is still in its infancy, maaaybe teenage stage? It's gonna take time for all the pieces to fall into place. It will, do doubt, but we're not there. Not even close.

Games have been products you could buy/pay for for upwards of 40 years now.

Things don't magically change over time, you have to make the effort.

[Comet]

To be fair, us hardcore gamers are a terrible bunch of people who judge quickly and have a sense of entitlement about everything.

[demidar]

Agree with the article except for that part about it being the biggest problem, I think the biggest problem is gross mismanagement, upper brass incompetence because they are behind the whole culture of silence and the people steering the company ship yet aren't into video games. I wouldn't mind seeing what goes on behind the scenes you know, have you felt the passion behind the guy doing the modern XCOM game? (The strategy one not the shooter, who the hell thought that was a good idea?) I am so psyched to get XCOM later in the year.

But yeah SE not even confirming the game that they announced is still in development is the stupidest. I'm pretty much convinced Versus 13 is vapourware until it's sitting on store shelves. Doesn't help that SE is terribly mismanaged imo, the versus team probably had half their team bllindfolded and bagged and taken to the FF14 offices. Also why do we hate Kotaku again? I forget.

[Gooster]

I was in agreement with the article the moment I read "Suikoden II."

[Htown]

To be fair, us hardcore gamers are a terrible bunch of people who judge quickly and have a sense of entitlement about everything.

Damn, they got another one.

[Delusibeta]

The problem is, really broadly speaking, games journalists are the enemy. They have been known to take things out of context and spin them out of control, produce rubbish that attracts clicks and make ghastly mistakes in their articles. Add in the effect of the internet and it really shouldn't be a big surprise that companies are cagey. Of course, there are exceptions, mainly indie developers (because hey, publicity is publicity), but for major AAA studios? Yeah, I see where they're coming from.

[jschreier]

I was in agreement with the article the moment I read "Suikoden II."

Last I checked, new copies of Suikoden II were going on eBay for $750. You'd think Konami would want in on that action.

[ClosingADoor]

Gaming journalism can easily make or break a game, even a company at this point. It has happened repeatedly and is often met with a resounding "oh well, isn't that a shame then." Developer/publisher silence is simply one if the biggest problems "for them" (journos) but certainly not for the industry as a whole. As for 38 studios fiasco, I dont see how they could have done anything different, you're damn straight it is in their best interest to keep tight-lipped until the last minute. If they had handled things better they might gave had some chance to sell their studio/assets/IP and keep development going. Obviously in that particular case it could never be, but in a similar situation it's far from unheard of. Of course given the circumstances it's far easier to take advantage of a dramatic situation and get easy clicks out of it for journos (hell, who doesn't wanna watch a 20-car-pileup? I'm there too!) Come to think of it, this is almost a bad example from any angle, although in more "respectable" cases it's been handled with far more dignity (ATVI/vivendi unloading double fine, terminal reality games, etc) and with generally more favorable conclusions. So long as game development is still such a giant cluster-f of an industry with so much riding on pure speculation, fanboyism and double-talk, it is absolutely in their best interest to control/skew PR as much as possible and deal with the bigger issues (building the game properly and maintaining community support in spite of potential drama in the shark-infested waters of journalism)

Wait, you are arguing that journalists shouldn't report on an issue because it could hurt the company they report about? It isn't the journalist responsibility to keep up share prices, provide profit or sell games, they just need to report about it. And when a game is rumoured to be canceled, why shouldn't they ask the company and report about it. And why can't the company answer such a simple question.

The tight grip game publisher PR wants to have over every bit of information is just sad to me. From the massive bullshit about not allowing filming/recording of footage to the NDA's that restrict previews or reviews to certain dates, to a PR guy telling developers what they can tell about their game.

[Comet]

Damn, they got another one.

?

[Effect]

To be fair, us hardcore gamers are a terrible bunch of people who judge quickly and have a sense of entitlement about everything.

I really hate the way this word is used. I'm a consumer first and foremost. I and others have a reasonable expectation that the product (game) will be worth the money we are being asked to pay. We have an expectation to be treated well or we won't buy the product from the company. To many gamers willingly take crap from companies and these companies continue to act the way they do because they feel they'll suffer no consequence. People really need to start talking with their wallets and not simply accept what is toss to them as if they are a dog and someone is tossing them a bone. Remember they need us more then we need them. People need to learn that. Why some people accept this from game companies when they certainly wouldn't from other companies I don't understand. Stop being doormats and simply atms for game companies.

[Trey]

The gaming industry is still in its infancy, maaaybe teenage stage? It's gonna take time for all the pieces to fall into place. It will, do doubt, but we're not there. Not even close.

It makes money like an adult and has a cultural hold as strong as any entertainment industry. How do you determine gaming's relative maturity?

[Boerseun]

They epitomise everything that is wrong with so-called games journalism. If I was a game developer, I'm not sure I would even want to be seen speaking with Kotaku.

[vocab]

Capcom's guilty, Dishonored is guilty, SE is guilty, etc etc.

Most of them are scared to show their game to the public. I like how Quantic Dreams showed more footage of actual game play then some companies this E3.

I get Capcom lives on hype, and if they say DLC before the game comes out this time around, no one will buy it. However, the other companies need all the feedback, and publicity they can get.

[Comet]

I really hate the way this word is used. I'm a consumer first and foremost. I and others have a reasonable expectation that the product (game) will be worth the money we are being asked to pay. We have an expectation to be treated well or we won't buy the product from the company. To many gamers willingly take crap from companies and these companies continue to act the way they do because they feel they'll suffer no consequence. People really need to start talking with their wallets and not simply accept what is toss to them as if they are a dog and someone is tossing them a bone. Remember they need us more then we need them. People need to learn that. Why some people accept this from game companies when they certainly wouldn't from other companies I don't understand. Stop being doormats and simply atms for game companies.

And I'll agree with everything you said, BUT I'll say that there's a very loud and vocal minority of gamers that are insatiable. I'm just like you, if a company fucks over people or ruin a favorite franchise (looking at you Square) I just don't buy their shit or buy it when its $5-10 or even used. I'm all about reflecting discontent with $$$ but that's a different thing than some gamers who incessantly bitch on official game forums demanding this change here, a nerf or buff on this item/unit here, these extra features that no one really wants, etc.

[CyclopsRock]

That's right: Square Enix wouldn't even say how many people worked on one of their games. Even though I can just go in and count the credits.

If games are anything like film (and I don't know if they are) then the credits don't show the entire crew by any means.

[John Rabbit]

the biggest problem are sites like kotaku aligning themselves with the average gamer, consumers, while simultaneously being part of the incestuous PR machine of the game's industry.

game journalists have more in common with car salesmen than actual journalists.

[Zuhzuhzombie!!]

Makes me think of the NPD hissy fit.

Can't blame them for wanting to hide their incompetence.

[wondermega]

Wait, you are arguing that journalists shouldn't report on an issue because it could hurt the company they report about? It isn't the journalist responsibility to keep up share prices, provide profit or sell games, they just need to report about it. And when a game is rumoured to be canceled, why shouldn't they ask the company and report about it. And why can't the company answer such a simple question. The tight grip game publisher PR wants to have over every bit of information is just sad to me. From the massive bullshit about not allowing filming/recording of footage to the NDA's that restrict previews or reviews to certain dates, to a PR guy telling developers what they can tell about their game.

I'm just saying that any information is privileged and someone owns it, technically. It's often the case that it is improperly distributed/twisted/misunderstood and can easily be damning to a publisher's/developer's/individual's livelihood, and therefore it is very important to control the flow from the source. I don't think anyone can really blame journos for "doing their job" (regardless of industry) as it is to their own detriment if they fail to get eyeballs/build up a rep. But likewise no one should blame pubs/devs for trying to manage control of their own business/properties (and therefore, their own rep as well) so long as it is in their ability to do so. If they are doing a good enough job, people will be disappointed in the interim (and journos don't get their juicy stories) but everyone wins with great content to play, report about, and continue to make.

In an ideal world, anyway. Some pubs have it figured out fairly nicely.

[LukeSmith]

Kotaku's take here is pretty narrow. Their problem, "Nobody wants to talk" is really just a problem to them/press. No one who actually works in the game industry, cares about this.

I certainly can't speak to how it's [kotaku] run now, but back in the day, when your site/blog writers are paid per post and then traffic numbers per story/per author dictate bonuses, it's not exactly going to incent the type of longform, investigative, well-researched piece (say, something like Klepek does), it's going to drive quick stories with flashy headlines.

Over time - hell, even in the short term - that's going to have negative repercussions.

From the piece:
Game makers are afraid to get our hopes up about projects that might be cancelled. They won't talk about games they've spent months or years creating. They won't show us prototypes or tell us about problems or even answer the most rudimentary questions, like "will this game be multiplatform?" or "can we use guns in this one?"

None of these questions are even interesting.

There's nothing "rudimentary" about a question about which platform a game will be on, and often times the answer and reasons for said answer are a lot more complicated than whatever flashy headline is going to get slapped on it to get a bunch of hits.

I hope this article was written for free.

[bigas]

Man, I can't believe GAF bought this!

IF Kotaku or any other "videogame journal" website is not getting their answers, how can SE be solely convicted? Why isn't Kotaku bringing other publisher's empty answers to the table to prove their point?

Of course at this point everyone must be tired of covering FFVSXIII for more than 6 years, but that's their job. For me, if they're not getting the answers they want is because they're doing the wrong questions.

[ClosingADoor]

I'm just saying that any information is privileged and someone owns it, technically. It's often the case that it is improperly distributed/twisted/misunderstood and can easily be damning to a publisher's/developer's/individual's livelihood, and therefore it is very important to control the flow from the source. I don't think anyone can really blame journos for "doing their job" (regardless of industry) as it is to their own detriment if they fail to get eyeballs/build up a rep. But likewise no one should blame pubs/devs for trying to manage control of their own business/properties (and therefore, their own rep as well) so long as it is in their ability to do so. If they are doing a good enough job, people will be disappointed in the interim (and journos don't get their juicy stories) but everyone wins with great content to play, report about, and continue to make. In an ideal world, anyway. Some pubs have it figured out fairly nicely.

Sure, they have the right to control that information. But that doesn't make it any better. I get why some information needs to be kept quiet until releases from the publishers position, because it can hurt sales, they have a marketing plan and such. But to me it seems publishers take it a bit too far the past years and try to control every little thing because they are so afraid something might go wrong.

There's nothing "rudimentary" about a question about which platform a game will be on, and often times the answer and reasons for said answer are a lot more complicated than whatever flashy headline is going to get slapped on it to get a bunch of hits.

Seems to me the platform a game will be published on is one of the most important things to know for a gamer.

But I do agree that the quality on a lot of gaming sites and blogs is lacking. But there are also plenty of them with quality content, just not enough people looking for that kind of content sadly.

[wondermega]

Sure, they have the right to control that information. But that doesn't make it any better. I get why some information needs to be kept quiet until releases from the publishers position, because it can hurt sales, they have a marketing plan and such. But to me it seems publishers take it a bit too far the past years and try to control every little thing because they are so afraid something might go wrong.

Do I need to link to that thread detailing all the devs which have been shuttered in the past 5 years? There's plenty of reasons to be afraid things can go wrong, it's not like there is no precedent for this. Stakes are just higher than they have ever been; anyway I don't see what the typical "informed" gamer has to worry about since there generally seems to be no shortage of info being disseminated across the board anyway, in general. Some entities are famously tight-lipped - R*, valve, blizz- and no one really raises a stink about their practices, maybe it's partly because people already have expectations.

[MiniBossBattle]

Game development industry do talk... to each other. The industry is a small pool of talented people that often work on shortened, flawed games but don't want to spill the beans to a game blog. The VFX film industry is just as intimate where you sign agreements not to talk to film blogs.

The people that leak are mostly on the publisher/advertising side anyways.

[Felix Lighter]

I certainly can't speak to how it's [kotaku] run now, but back in the day, when your site/blog writers are paid per post and then traffic numbers per story/per author dictate bonuses, it's not exactly going to incent the type of longform, investigative, well-researched piece (say, something like Klepek does), it's going to drive quick stories with flashy headlines.

While we're striving to make things are more transparent, I think it's very important for us to know how the writers at Kotaku are incentivized. Is Kotaku still structured the way Luke Smith just described? If not, how is it structured?

Writers that use tiny sound bites out of context to make sensationalized headlines are partially to blame for the publishers' desire to put tight controls on PR. Things may have gotten completely out of hand but bloggers who care more about traffic than accuracy have no room to complain when people don't want to talk to them.

[jschreier]

I am salaried. I do not get paid per hit.

[Felix Lighter]

I am salaried. I do not get paid per hit.

That is huge step in the right direction. Thanks for the quick, to the point, response.

[LiK]

I am salaried. I do not get paid per hit.

megaton

[flyinpiranha]

Ah then it might mean that they don't want to talk to Kotaku.

Hah, you might be on to something. I think IGN ran a rumor also.

Either way. I have no problem with Kotaku, their fluff articles like the Gamer Girl is obvious for what it is, their Rumor articles are stated rumor for the most part.

I just don't see the issue, they give a lot of information, I am of the belief it's up to the user to discern what information they take to heart.

[Muffdraul]

there's nothing wrong with announcing anything early. That's a good thing. That's a good start. It's the follow-up that sucks. They announce it early and then pretend it doesn't exist for many stretches of time until release. Instead of PR working so hard to keep info hidden, why not give regular updates on how things are going, etc...let everyone know things are progressing. Drop a picture when you can, a teaser video when you can, etc...

The sucky follow up is merely a symptom of the real problem- announcing upcoming games before they're ready to promote them and give info. To me that's the definition of announcing too early. Don't announce until you're prepared to follow up.

[Cheech]

It is funny the writer brought up Dawnguard specifically.

Quite honestly, it is stuff like that that has soured me on gaming. 2012 represents a record low in game expenditures for me going back to 1982 or so. The reason for this is I'm sick of the WoW clones, endless shooters, the drive to monetize everything that used to be given to gamers as a gesture of goodwill, and generally being treated like crap by the industry I have spent tens of thousands of dollars on over the years. I've honestly had it.

Battlefield 4 is another example of a publisher willing to eviscerate its customer base and drop support for their current games as soon as humanly possible. "Here is your finite set of paid DLC for Battlefield 3, you're welcome, now please buy this minor upgrade at full price one year later."

On the console side, things are even worse. You have the odd gem like Fez, kneecapped because its developer can't swing the 40k payment for Microsoft to put a fucking patch out for it. It's just galling greed, and I am losing my will to support an industry that operates like that.

[StuBurns]

Seems to me the platform a game will be published on is one of the most important things to know for a gamer. But I do agree that the quality on a lot of gaming sites and blogs is lacking. But there are also plenty of them with quality content, just not enough people looking for that kind of content sadly.

Yes, it's important to the gamer, but the gamer has no inherent rights to that information before the publisher deems it right to announce.

Bungie are a good example really, although lots of information leaked, so we know it's MS exclusive for a year (or was), that information is meant to come at a specific time. MS could have agreed to significant co-marketing effort in response to being able to announce that at a time that suits them.

FFXIII might have had screenshots and trailers for years in dark controlled rooms, but it wasn't until SE US started to do their real marketing that the trailers turned up officially on sites, and on PSN etc, and they were named 'trailer 1' etc despite actually being fifth or whatever.

SE don't owe Kotaku information about the development of Versus XIII, they clearly had no reliable source, SE don't have to comment on rumors and speculation. They have a marketing roll out planned and anything that interrupts that is bad, anything that interrupts that and is bullshit is worth avoiding.

[Karsticles]

Kotaku has it backwards. It's because everyone spreads rumors and freaks out about everything that companies have to keep a lid on stuff.

[LukeSmith]

I am salaried. I do not get paid per hit.

How do bonuses work over there now?

[Bitmap Frogs]

They're not afraid to tell us who stars in films, but gaming doesn't really have stars.

I'd say they deliberately attempt to suppress the creation of "star directors" or "star designers" because the bargaining powers these types have in Hollywood. It makes easier to manage teams from a corporate position when you can fire people at will without customers even knowing.

[Snapshot King]

Yever think that maybe companies don't want to talk to you about rumours considering what a trashy and shoddily run operation Kotaku is? Maybe they don't want their remarks taken out of context for a bizarre, later rescinded editorial sandwiched between interviews with japanese porn actresses and the re-printed press releases for rare action figures of 12 year old girls?

[Bitmap Frogs]

It is funny the writer brought up Dawnguard specifically. Quite honestly, it is stuff like that that has soured me on gaming. 2012 represents a record low in game expenditures for me going back to 1982 or so. The reason for this is I'm sick of the WoW clones, endless shooters, the drive to monetize everything that used to be given to gamers as a gesture of goodwill, and generally being treated like crap by the industry I have spent tens of thousands of dollars on over the years. I've honestly had it. Battlefield 4 is another example of a publisher willing to eviscerate its customer base and drop support for their current games as soon as humanly possible. "Here is your finite set of paid DLC for Battlefield 3, you're welcome, now please buy this minor upgrade at full price one year later." On the console side, things are even worse. You have the odd gem like Fez, kneecapped because its developer can't swing the 40k payment for Microsoft to put a fucking patch out for it. It's just galling greed, and I am losing my will to support an industry that operates like that.

I feel that way.

I'm old enough to remember when you got full color manuals and goodies just for buying the game!

That's why cdprojekt is so awesome, the regular witcher 2 edition was like the games we used to buy back then. I just wish they had the muscle to put out more than two games per decade =/

[demidar]

It is funny the writer brought up Dawnguard specifically. Quite honestly, it is stuff like that that has soured me on gaming. 2012 represents a record low in game expenditures for me going back to 1982 or so. The reason for this is I'm sick of the WoW clones, endless shooters, the drive to monetize everything that used to be given to gamers as a gesture of goodwill, and generally being treated like crap by the industry I have spent tens of thousands of dollars on over the years. I've honestly had it. Battlefield 4 is another example of a publisher willing to eviscerate its customer base and drop support for their current games as soon as humanly possible. "Here is your finite set of paid DLC for Battlefield 3, you're welcome, now please buy this minor upgrade at full price one year later." On the console side, things are even worse. You have the odd gem like Fez, kneecapped because its developer can't swing the 40k payment for Microsoft to put a fucking patch out for it. It's just galling greed, and I am losing my will to support an industry that operates like that.

This is why I don't buy EA games, if you give them an inch they'll take a mile. And it's mighty easy to ignore their games because I'm inundated with indie/f2p games.

[Meatvillain]

The headline is a little sensationalist, but that's headlines for you, I guess? The article seems to bring up some valid points.

[Absoludacrous]

Did Kotaku ask Molyneux how well transparency worked out for him?

[Bitmap Frogs]

This is why I don't buy EA games, if you give them an inch they'll take a mile. And it's mighty easy to ignore their games because I'm inundated with indie/f2p games.

I don't support them neither... jesus even venerable sim city is re-emerging as nothing else than DLC bait.

[flyinpiranha]

Did Kotaku ask Molyneux how well transparency worked out for him?

Games sell well, rated well, and he's still continuing to make games so ... I'd say pretty well?

[Conciliator]

It seems like we've been getting more 'gameplay trailers' recently, which is a step in the right direction. Stuff like the video for that new Ubisoft joint(sorry, can't remember the weird name) at E3, or the recent Sleeping Dogs gameplay segment. It's really refershing to have someone who knows what they're talking sit down - for more than a minute or too - and in clear, articulate language, explain the gameplay mechanics and flow. As opposed to getting a teaser about how a game that we know nothing about is about to be announced and that it will revolutionize video games forever. Just be straight up. We're here because we like playing video games.

[Retro_]

We don't have good sources? Come on. We've reported quite a few rumors that have turned out to be correct. The Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 leak, Assassin Creed III's protagonist, Zipper closing, Radical closing, the next Xbox/PlayStation being called Durango/Orbis, etc. And again, this Versus thing still seems fishy. Let's reserve judgement on the validity of those sources until Square Enix actually releases the game! (Or cancels it, or rebrands it FFXV.)

Yeah I can imagine why publishers would avoid talking to you guys after that.