Support NeoGAF

[Fjordson]

I want to hear Garnett's opinions about everything.

But I think before you talk about PS All Stars, tell everyone where you're coming from. Tell them you have a relationship with someone on the team. So it's out in the open and everyone knows and can decide for themselves what to think of your opinions.

Yep. Exactly how I feel. It's the reason I still enjoy visiting Giant Bomb. They put their personalities out there and are transparent enough so I know where they're coming from with games.

And I personally think the same thing is true for Garnett. Been listening to him on various shows for almost six years now and I've never had a problem with the way he communicates his opinions to the audience.

 

[f0rk]

The one thing that's surprised about this games press bullshit is how many people were apparently failing to take things with varying degrees of salt before.
Geoff Keighley now does most of his work for corporations? No fucking shit!
Some nobodies from games sites you've never heard of will do anything to get a PS3 because they earn no money? No way!!
Another girl I've never heard of who has freelanced for the likes of The Sun and Playboy (bastions of journalistic integrity) is a square enix shrill? Guess I'll have to stop going to Playboy for my reviews!
PR has a lot of control over pre release information about the game? Of course they do, that's their job! It's not hard to tell which opinions are shaped completely by it (yo what up Andrea), especially when there's so much video content around today.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm finding this 'journalism' story really dumb. The point is talk about All Stars all you want, we know your relationship with it and I think I can trust myself enough to take your opinion with a pinch of salt.

 

[krae_man]

I know where everything is on the PS3 as well. No way in the world you are getting onto the store and queuing up a demo in a second as claimed on the PSN store. Longer than the 360 for that sort of stuff in my experience.

XMB and the Store are two separate things. As far as the stores go IMO they both have issues with easy browsing of content.

 

[Shadow780]

Not to jump on the Andrea hate bandwagon, but it was hilarious when she was being confronted about her stance on the Wii U tablet and all she could muster was "But...I mean...but...".

They left her off the hook-so-to-speak so easily every time though.

 

[jmood88]

And I personally think the same thing is true for Garnett. Been listening to him on various shows for almost six years now and I've never had a problem with the way he communicates his opinions to the audience.

It's pretty annoying hearing how he communicates his opinion because it's sometimes hard to tell when he's being sincere and when he's exaggerating to "generate discussion".

 

[MikeE21286]

I couldn't disagree any more with Garnett that the new/current Xbox dashboard is "stopgap".

Look at Windows 8. Case and point.

 

[Curufinwe]

Their comments from this episode are getting torn to shreds in the games journalism/Doritos thread.

 

[ripastraea]

Their comments from this episode are getting torn to shreds in the games journalism/Doritos thread.

Link
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=43702835#post43702835

Listened to Weekend Confirmed 136 since they talk about this (starting around 63 minutes in). Blocked out some quotes and added comments. Legend: GL = Garnett Lee; JC = Jeff Cananata; AR = Andrea Rene.

GL: "I'm always avoiding using the word 'journalist.' There's some space for journalism in the video game world but it's not really what the audience really wants."

JC: "Exactly ... 95 percent of what people online are referring to games journalism is not. If you're approaching it as a reader expecting that from it, that's a mistake."

GL: "It's entertainment reporting."

I think the size of this thread, its number of views and the subsequent articles and editorials on the topic prove otherwise. People want to talk about this and have always wanted a better level and quality of reporting from those in the games press. Saying, "But, I'm not a journalist, so it's not fair to demand that of me," is a cop out.

For one, folks like Geoff Keighley still refer to themselves as game journalists. Go to his Twitter profile. It's the first line in his bio.

AR: "We get these products for free to talk about them because in order for us to you know, be competitive in the industry, we need to get the games beforehand. Reviewers want to know before the game's out and I just, like, think this whole idea, you know, that we shouldn't get stuff for free or this like payola system, like believing that exists, is such bull-cocky I tell you."

Except ethics are violated all the time, as I detailed in my editorial. The only things like personalities Andrea have to go on is trust and they severe that with the way they conduct themselves -- whether it's accepting free games, free travel, networking opportunities for business, etc.

JC: "Obviously we are in a position where we are a cog in a machine. I have very strong feelings that vacillate between two points of view because I get it. I get people wanting to be able to trust the people that they are reading or watching. I protect my opinion very strongly. I wish people cared this much about sh*t that really mattered ... I think that a lot of the hullabaloo and brouhaha comes from a place that it isn't really based in reality. I don't think anybody is truly shocked or would go to Geoff Keighley for something that would be invalidated by that photo. I think people are just pissed off at a guy who's very successful is successful in this way."

Nice. Jeff admits they're cogs in a machine, meaning they're very malleable when it comes to what they'll do, but then says, "You're just jealous of folks like Geoff Keighley." Nope. Has nothing to do with that.

AR: "The idea that we shouldn't have personal relationship with people in PR is silly."

It's silly that you think it's silly. You shouldn't have a personal relationship. You should have a professional one -- big difference.

GL: "But do you have personal relationships where you get free PS3s?"

AR: "No, but that'd be awesome. I have personal relationships with people at specific PR companies but I'm not putting a score on that game. Somebody else at the company is doing that"

Again, she doesn't see this is a problem, but it inherently is.

GL: "I don't like to talk about this subject because it's self evident. You could look at anyone's work - anyone." Starts talking about trip to Boston to cover Assassin's Creed 3 where dinner, travel, etc. is paid for. Say's he didn't go. "It's still a lot of work. You have to get your pieces done. You have to get in on deadline. You quickly atune yourself to PR speak, when they're messaging you ... I'll be honest: You pretty quickly tune that sh*t out."

Cognitive dissonance. You can say, "It doesn't affect me all you want." According to proven psychology, it does. Plus, the perception of it does not look good to your readers.

JC: "I understand the idea of it is offensive and the idea of it is problematic but in actuality and practicality, I don't understand, like, what do people want?"

People are tired with the way the video game press has been operating for so many years. They want it to operate under standard journalistic principles. They want you to be transparent, even if all you think you are is a personality and nothing more.

 

[Harlock]

I don´t agree with Cannata about the PS3 UI. Is simple and fast, like never going to be again, now that everything needs to be too much graphic. I love how is simple left/right, top/down when you need navigate in the PS3. They can make a better job with backup savings or doing a more clear name for "game data", but is a very good UI.

Love the referecen to the sonic screwdriver. Garnett is a fan of Doctor Who

About the journalism/ethic discussion, a guy did a really great post in the comments of shacknews site:

By: TV_Guy x
REPLY
I've been listening to the show for quite a while now, but it took the discussion about video game "journalism" to actually get me to create an account and weigh in. I spent about 12 years working as a broadcast journalist before moving on to teach media and communication at the university level. While I am now in academia, I still have strong ties to the journalism profession.

That's the key word-- profession. Journalists are professionals, not merely in the sense that they do journalism for a living, but also that they have formed a broad community or culture that shares a set of ethical standards for conduct within the profession. Of course, there are exceptions and people on the fringe in any profession-- doctors, lawyers, plumbers, and yes, journalists-- but in general a profession has an agreed on set of standards and it polices itself.

Mainstream journalists-- those who work in newspapers, television, radio, and increasing online-- are not only concerned about conflicts of interest. They are also concerned about the *appearance* of a conflict of interest.

I could write on at great length about how mainstream journalists avoid such conflicts (or sometimes fail to do so), but let me simply emphasize the most important point: video games journalism, or whatever you want to call it, is a young profession. So young, in fact, that one may not be able to truly call it that, at least not yet. As a practice, it has not been institutionalized-- games journalists have not come together to create any sort of organization that can codify ethical behavior, at least not successfully. That would be a good first step.

 

[DidntKnowJack]

GL: "I'm always avoiding using the word 'journalist.' There's some space for journalism in the video game world but it's not really what the audience really wants."

JC: "Exactly ... 95 percent of what people online are referring to games journalism is not. If you're approaching it as a reader expecting that from it, that's a mistake."

GL: "It's entertainment reporting."

The funny thing is Keighly clearly refers to himself as a journalist in his Twitter profile.

Saying "But but but we're not journalists! Why are you people getting so upset?!?" is a total cop out.

Jeff C: I think people are just pissed off at a guy who's very successful is successful in this way.

Saying we're upset because of jealousy is just infuriating.

 

[PowderedToast]

terrible, terrible response to the EG fiasco

 

[Nizz]

Their comments from this episode are getting torn to shreds in the games journalism/Doritos thread.

Link
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=43702835#post43702835

It was weird of Jeff to say that jealousy was a part of the backlash going on with the Keighly/Doritos thing. It sort of came off as "we're part of this clique you guys wish you could be a part of".

 

[eznark]

If the XMB is too complicated for you I think you should keep that to yourself. It's like admitting you can only tell time on a digital clock. It takes a special kind of stupid to be confused by that menu.

 

[chickdigger802]

to be fair, xmb is a chore to navigate if you don't use it often (game journalists playing ps3? LOL).

 

[mujun]

to be fair, xmb is a chore to navigate if you don't use it often (game journalists playing ps3? LOL).

Both of them are, if you ask me.

I need to take a few seconds to recall how to change a theme on the 360 every time I do it, for example.

I remember often being stumped by which settings category I had to go into on the PS3 whenever I wanted to change some more abstract setting.

The left-right-up-down of XMB is nice but it means you are going to get more things to scroll through as more options become available and things get more complex.

Embedding things deeper is an option if you want to cut down on horizontal and vertical clutter but then you can't see what is inside a section unless you actually enter it and that causes a different kind of problem.

I personally prefer the 360 menus but then again I have used it much more.

 

[Fjordson]

It's pretty annoying hearing how he communicates his opinion because it's sometimes hard to tell when he's being sincere and when he's exaggerating to "generate discussion".

Hmm, I don't know I can usually pick that stuff out easily. Though I may not be the best example here since I've been listening to Garnett for so long.

 

[Blazyr]

The raw vitriol in that thread and its related comments in this one set the new high for discouraging me.

I think I've done this a long time now; people have plenty of my record to see. It's no "cop-out" to say I'm not a journalist. It's a simple statement of fact. I don't investigate leads and report on events. I play games and then I give my opinion of them drawing from the experience of having similarly assessed hundreds of games.

I was going to write more but forget it. It only drags out the time spent by those of you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media. Are there some in the media who get swayed more than others? Probably, I don't know. I'm not a psychologist. Do I get swayed? I try very hard to be true to myself, it's the one thing I have that everything else is derived from. That said, I imagine it's all but impossible not to have some psychologic effect from that exposure. At the same time, my survival motivation of needing to be honest and transparent is damn powerful motivation too.

I think that holds true for a lot of the members of the games media and when it doesn't, it's easy to tell.

 

[CartridgeBlower]

It was weird of Jeff to say that jealousy was a part of the backlash going on with the Keighly/Doritos thing. It sort of came off as "we're part of this clique you guys wish you could be a part of".

No self-reflection or critical thought by 2N1T. Just total deflection and belittlement to the people who spend their time listening to this show. Nasty stuff.

 

[CartridgeBlower]

The raw vitriol in that thread and its related comments in this one set the new high for discouraging me.

I think I've done this a long time now; people have plenty of my record to see. It's no "cop-out" to say I'm not a journalist. It's a simple statement of fact. I don't investigate leads and report on events. I play games and then I give my opinion of them drawing from the experience of having similarly assessed hundreds of games.

I was going to write more but forget it. It only drags out the time spent by those of you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media. Are there some in the media who get swayed more than others? Probably, I don't know. I'm not a psychologist. Do I get swayed? I try very hard to be true to myself, it's the one thing I have that everything else is derived from. That said, I imagine it's all but impossible not to have some psychologic effect from that exposure. At the same time, my survival motivation of needing to be honest and transparent is damn powerful motivation too.

I think that holds true for a lot of the members of the games media and when it doesn't, it's easy to tell.

It's kind of crazy how many of you in the industry, journalist/reviewer/whatever, have gone running to this 'us vs. them' type of defense since this has all gone down. I guess it's only somewhat natural to be defensive when an entire profession is being critically analyzed through a microscope by its most diehard fans, but this type of broad generalization about your audience seems rather cowardly, and just plays to reaffirm so many of the fears that audience has about the people who work in it since this has all been brought up.

 

[Gomu Gomu]

The raw vitriol in that thread and its related comments in this one set the new high for discouraging me.

I think I've done this a long time now; people have plenty of my record to see. It's no "cop-out" to say I'm not a journalist. It's a simple statement of fact. I don't investigate leads and report on events. I play games and then I give my opinion of them drawing from the experience of having similarly assessed hundreds of games.

I was going to write more but forget it. It only drags out the time spent by those of you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media. Are there some in the media who get swayed more than others? Probably, I don't know. I'm not a psychologist. Do I get swayed? I try very hard to be true to myself, it's the one thing I have that everything else is derived from. That said, I imagine it's all but impossible not to have some psychologic effect from that exposure. At the same time, my survival motivation of needing to be honest and transparent is damn powerful motivation too.

I think that holds true for a lot of the members of the games media and when it doesn't, it's easy to tell.

You know what's funny? After I replied showing my disappointment in you personally in the other thread, someone replied to me saying this:

The problem with this kind of statement and name calling is that it really isn't going to do anything to address the problem. All it will cause them to do is to write off the criticism as being people who irrationally despise them.

I don't think dismissing particular websites or individuals is really helpful. Criticizing behavior and atittudes and scrutinizing the system of influences is.

I basically told him that I don't think you will dismiss me as just another "irrational hater" or as you put it in your post "you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media", because I'm not irrationally hating on you and I'm not of the "hate everything & everyone crowd". It's too bad that he was right about you. I thought you would understand our frustration, and engage with us to try discuss this issue further. But I guess not.

Again, what a shame.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

I wish andrew stopped saying like so much.

 

[Massa]

You know what's funny? After I replied showing my disappointment in you personally in the other thread, someone replied to me saying this:




I basically told him that I don't think you will dismiss me as just another "irrational hater" or as you put it in your post "you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media", because I'm not irrationally hating on you and I'm not of the "hate everything & everyone crowd". It's too bad that he was right about you. I thought you would understand our frustration, and engage with us to try discuss this issue further. But I guess not.

Again, what a shame.

For every one comment in that thread like yours, there's 50 that basically boil down to "lol games journalism". People just don't have faith in anyone and ridicule everything. It's not sane or productive for someone that's in Garnett's position to engage in the discussion in that thread, specially since he's associated with Andrea's comments on the topic which were pretty damn terrible.

What he should do instead is read the best comments over there (usually highlighted in the OP) and take what he can from them, while keeping in mind that he's actually better than most of his peers when it comes to that stuff. Most game critics are absolutely fucking terrible* and people just generalize. One common example is Gamespot, which people here still treat as complete shit due to Gerstmann-gate when these days they're actually one of the best gaming sites there is.

*As an aside, I personally blame gamers instead of PR for that situation. Go look at people's reactions to 8/10 or 8.8, even on GAF which is supposed to be one of the better forums. There's no audience for criticism, gamers just want confirmation.

 

[Anatoli Bacharach]

I agree that this podcast's treatment of the recent games press hubbub was frustrating to listen to.

What especially irked me was Cannata saying something to the effect of: "I wish people cared this much about stuff that actually mattered, like politics."

Come on, dude! If you don't think this stuff matters then why are you in this line of work? Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but it clearly matters to many of us, otherwise we wouldn't be here on GAF in the first place.

 

[Gomu Gomu]

For every one comment in that thread like yours, there's 50 that basically boil down to "lol games journalism". People just don't have faith in anyone and ridicule everything. It's not sane or productive for someone that's in Garnett's position to engage in the discussion in that thread, specially since he's associated with Andrea's comments on the topic which were pretty damn terrible.

What he should do instead is read the best comments over there (usually highlighted in the OP) and take what he can from them, while keeping in mind that he's actually better than most of his peers when it comes to that stuff. Most game critics are absolutely fucking terrible* and people just generalize. One common example is Gamespot, which people here still treat as complete shit due to Gerstmann-gate when these days they're actually one of the best gaming sites there is.

*As an aside, I personally blame gamers instead of PR for that situation. Go look at people's reactions to 8/10 or 8.8, even on GAF which is supposed to be one of the better forums. There's no audience for criticism, gamers just want confirmation.

Having being reading that thread for days now, I think your assessment that it's mostly people saying "Game Journalism lololol" is quite wrong. There are many reasonable posts, A LOT of good points being presented by both sides, and just plain good discussions.

I think it's easy for press people to dismiss this subject by saying "they hate us, so what's the point in getting into it", or "Hey this thing is not about me", while not taking the time to read what's in the OP, and see where are people coming from and why is this such a big deal to them.

I always placed Garnett in high regards when it comes to engaging posters and the readers. I mean I've seen some pretty fucking nasty things said to the guy throughout the years, yet he still gets into forums and engages readers. It takes a strong ass man to not be affected by this. I know it's not as easy as some might think, but he did it, and continue doing it.
Too bad when the subject became sensitive to him, and his job he copped out using both the "I'm not a journalist" & the "they already irrationally hate me/us" excuses.

 

[Massa]

Garnett's been saying he's not a journalist for years, like eznark pointed out in this very thread. You can't use that as proof that he's copping out. He also addressed the issue on his show and will probably do it again next week, so how is that copping out? Not discussing it on GAF in a thread that is already hostile against him is not the same as ignoring it. In fact, right in the beginning of the show you can tell Andrea was worried about tackling the issue on-air, and Garnett's tone when he replied to that showed he was absolutely fine with addressing it.

 

[frequency]

I don't get why people have problems with critics vs journalists.

I think it makes perfect sense. Garnett (and most other people gamers like to call "journalists") are critics. Is Roger Ebert considered a journalist? Or your local news reporter?

People are holding critics to impossible journalistic standards. I really do not care for any of that stuff. I just care about opinions. If they were journalists then I'd care but they're not. They're just people who happen to write and speak about games.

Journalism in gaming is like the Polygon feature about game development in the Middle East. It has nothing to do with reviews or reporting video game news. If people want to criticize specific features articles for bias or for being "bought" then that's different.

I don't know. It just feels like NeoGAF has been on a crusade against games media for a long time and I don't think it's fair. It really bums me out that it's discouraging people like Garnett.

"I'm not a journalist."
"Yes you are. And you suck as one!"

So stupid.

Games are entertainment. I like to read/hear the opinion of other people because it adds to my enjoyment of this hobby. I like to come back often to read/hear the opinions of someone like Garnett because he has a history and I understand his tastes better than random forum people. If people like Garnett get a free dinner or make friends with some game developer people, I just keep that in mind but it doesn't disqualify their opinions. If I believe there is an irreconcilable bias, life isn't over... because "games are toys". I'll find another critic for opinions. It's not going to influence a country to vote a certain way or hurt a group of people.

I really do not understand why games criticism is held to such impossibly high standards but every other type of criticism gets to keep going as they are. I think in the crusade against games media, people have confused criticism with journalism and just attack all things related to games media. Because it's the cool thing to do.


EDIT: There is some discussion to be had and some people do have valid points, but what valid criticism exists is drowned out in the mob of hate and anger and vitriol against things the majority of them don't even understand.

 

[Gomu Gomu]

I never said Garnett is a journalist, mind you. I know he calls himself a games critic. And being a critic he voices his opinions on games on an official matter, he gets free games, has relationships with PR, gets flown to attend events where he is housed, dined and taken care of. All of this makes him relevant to the subject at hand. So calling yourself a games critic and saying "I'm not a journalist" and that's that sounds like cop out tome. At least from discussing it with forum posters.
Now if he spends time to read the OP, and the links provided there, so he can look into his work and maybe rethink some of the things about it, and how he does it, without the need to actually get into discussions with poster. Then I would apologize for Mr. Lee. It would have been wrong of me to say what I have said about you.

Edit: I want to clarify something. I am not in any way shape or form accusing Garnett of any foul intentions when it comes to doing his job. Because, if you read the thread, the cases where the writer is actually aware and abiding of the wishes of PR are not common at all. It's a big issue because throughout the years of research, and after billions of dollars spent, PR wants to you to NOT know that they are affecting your judgment or using you exactly how they wanted. It's the fact that they want you to feel and truly believe as if you are immune to it. That's why I think this is a very important issue/thread that all writers must read and think about, especially the writers we care about and value.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

It was weird of Jeff to say that jealousy was a part of the backlash going on with the Keighly/Doritos thing.

I wish I could sit next to a chair full of Doritos.

He stole my dreams ;_;

 

[Oxx]

Seeing as most media figures manage to pick-out only the most irrational and hyperbolic GAF comments to respond to, I can't be surprised that they can't see the wood for the trees on the issue of the appearance of impropriety.

But luckily for us, every writer who has weighed-in on the subject is supremely confident in their immunity to all forms of PR manipulation, so we're ok.

 

[RedNumberFive]

It was weird of Jeff to say that jealousy was a part of the backlash going on with the Keighly/Doritos thing. It sort of came off as "we're part of this clique you guys wish you could be a part of".

Not weird at all. Jeff supports some of the most disgusting publisher bullshit and pulls out the "entitled gamer" card at every opportunity

 

[Interfectum]

Yeah I'm not sure why he pulled out the jealousy card. Looking at that image doesn't make me jealous, it makes me sad. Also sucks that games are associated with that garbage food.

 

[Dennis]

It was weird of Jeff to say that jealousy was a part of the backlash going on with the Keighly/Doritos thing. It sort of came off as "we're part of this clique you guys wish you could be a part of".

That is a very common problem. That the people in the games media can barely contain their disdain for their readers and viewers.

I guess it comes from the perception - evidence to the contrary - that people who game as a hobby are all pimple-faced teenage dudebro COD fans or immature manbabies.

 

[hwy_61]

Just popping in to say that the discussion on Warfighter was pretty good. Also, less Andrea, please. She talks about how she's a HUGE nintendo fan, but then shits all over the WiiU, and its ideas? I didn't like the way they were all ganging up on Cannata about it, it was very childish.

 

[Harlock]

Totalbiscuit make a video very good to show how Warfighter is very bad (and other military shooters):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOHyD49DaeA

Remember me that image:

 

[dock]

No good could come from Garnett talking about PS Allstars. I think his opt out approach is admirable.

I wonder how many press have had extended romantic involvement with developers. Like many industries, people within the scene tend to hook up. Plenty of game developers are in relationships with other game devs - especially indie devs! People love to promote and support their friends, but with critics it's important to be transparent about your agenda.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Yeah I'm not sure why he pulled out the jealousy card. Looking at that image doesn't make me jealous, it makes me sad. Also sucks that games are associated with that garbage food.

You mean iconic garbage food.

I just don't think you and your old-timey ways understand my demo, man. If I ever see a guy talking about stuff and there aren't any Doritos or Mountain Dew I'm like, something feels wrong here. I can't connect with this.

 

[Jake Tower]

I'm jealous of Jeff Green

He gets that sweet Doritos and Dew monies

and he's the next link in human evolution

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

and he's the next link in human evolution

WHAT IS THIS NIGHTMARE I DON'T EVEN

He gets that sweet Doritos and Dew monies

Whew. Okay. Mountain Dew. I feel safe again. I know this is about me.

 

[krae_man]

The raw vitriol in that thread and its related comments in this one set the new high for discouraging me.

I think I've done this a long time now; people have plenty of my record to see. It's no "cop-out" to say I'm not a journalist. It's a simple statement of fact. I don't investigate leads and report on events. I play games and then I give my opinion of them drawing from the experience of having similarly assessed hundreds of games.

I was going to write more but forget it. It only drags out the time spent by those of you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media. Are there some in the media who get swayed more than others? Probably, I don't know. I'm not a psychologist. Do I get swayed? I try very hard to be true to myself, it's the one thing I have that everything else is derived from. That said, I imagine it's all but impossible not to have some psychologic effect from that exposure. At the same time, my survival motivation of needing to be honest and transparent is damn powerful motivation too.

I think that holds true for a lot of the members of the games media and when it doesn't, it's easy to tell.

There's lots of stuff that you can talk about. How do Shacknews rules differ from that of your former employer? They seem to be less strict. I remember after the E3 where Microsoft gave away all those 360's to the press, 1up staff said on all their podcasts they are not allowed to keep them(They ended up giving them all away in Twitter Contests). They also made fun of an intern who got pissed off when he was told he couldn't keep his.

Contrast that to your show where someone(not you. I want to say Xav but I'm not 100% sure) was talking about how awesome the 360 slim was and how it was super quiet and whatnot with a quick footnote at the end "full disclosure I got it for free".

That's quite a difference. How does that effect you? Do you hold yourself to a higher standard then your employer holds you to?

What about all those times where looking back you laugh at some of the stuff you and others said while "Caught in the hype"? "GTAIV has Oscar worthy acting" and whatnot?

How many times have you talked about a game as if it's the greatest thing ever when it comes out only to talk about it as if it's a total pile of crap 6 months later? I'm embellishing a little here, but people in the games media being far more critical of games a few months later then they were in the moment is common. This phenomenon has usually been chalked up to "having more time to think, getting to spend more time with the game, playing games that did things better that came out later etc". But How much of it was actually the enviroment PR created to try and influence your decision?

 

[Massa]

This phenomenon has usually been chalked up to "having more time to think, getting to spend more time with the game, playing games that did things better that came out later etc". But How much of it was actually the enviroment PR created to try and influence your decision?

Gamers do that all the time. Problem is not the environment PR created but simply that gamers live on hype. They spend more time anticipating and drooling over unreleased games than they do actually appreciating them after they come out.

We've even seen gamers complain when Garnett played an older game and tried to talk about it on the show, it was Assassin's Creed 2 I think. Again, the audience gets what it deserves.

Now, the environment created by PR certainly has an effect on things. For example, games like Medal of Honor would get absolutely zero attention if if they were put put out by Namco, or made available only on the Vita. It's as uninteresting as a game as it can get: a bad clone of a popular franchise.

When Ubisoft flies you to Rome or Boston to see their game it won't affect your opinion of it when judging what you see (other things will if you're not experienced, like the carefully crafted demo section), and you may actually be annoyed at the inconvenience and delays that it causes you. But regardless of all that, you can't ignore the clear message: this game is important. This automatically qualifies it for a one hour discussion on most podcasts, it will be a game of the year candidate at the VGA's and other awards and other crap like that.

For example, one of my top three games this year is LBP Vita and it didn't get any marketing or PR done for it, and it's been completely ignored on all but one podcast that I listen to, which also happens to be the one made by non industry professionals (that's P1P). So what makes a game worth discussing on a podcast: how novel it is, how good it is, how popular it is... it's a question worth asking for anyone that covers video games.

Another example: I've seen three people that played AC3 and AC3 Liberation already, and 3 out of 3 were more positive about the Vita game. What do you think are the chances of it rating better on Metacritic, even if it indeed turns out to be the better game?

 

[Blazyr]

The combination of aggressively attacking the media and then accusing the media of having and us vs them mentality doesn't help matters.

I hope most readers here know that I've always thought of it as being a group together that I've been fortunate enough to be in the campfire ring talking with. How on earth would I think of the audience as some sort of enemy?

The worst part is caring, the exact part the accusation says I don't have, is what motivates me to participate in the discussion.

 

[beastmode]

The raw vitriol in that thread and its related comments in this one set the new high for discouraging me.

I think I've done this a long time now; people have plenty of my record to see. It's no "cop-out" to say I'm not a journalist. It's a simple statement of fact. I don't investigate leads and report on events. I play games and then I give my opinion of them drawing from the experience of having similarly assessed hundreds of games.

I was going to write more but forget it. It only drags out the time spent by those of you who've chosen to hate everyone in the games media. Are there some in the media who get swayed more than others? Probably, I don't know. I'm not a psychologist. Do I get swayed? I try very hard to be true to myself, it's the one thing I have that everything else is derived from. That said, I imagine it's all but impossible not to have some psychologic effect from that exposure. At the same time, my survival motivation of needing to be honest and transparent is damn powerful motivation too.

I think that holds true for a lot of the members of the games media and when it doesn't, it's easy to tell.

Huh?

NeoGAF practically worships Shawn & Jeff.

 

[LiveFromKyoto]

Gamers do that all the time. Problem is not the environment PR created but simply that gamers live on hype. They spend more time anticipating and drooling over unreleased games than they do actually appreciating them after they come out.

It's true. The audience is complicit in this too. Just a couple of weeks ago we were all giving these guys grief for not being hyped enough about the Wii U. Riding the hype train is a big part of the fun of following gaming news, and we do tune in to podcasts like this one to get more current views from the inside of that train.

But at the same time, nobody likes to feel duped. That's kind of the heart of why this matters and shouldn't be blown off, it undermines the fundamental relationship between the gaming press and its audience. Because if they just act as PR mouthpieces, they have no reason to exist. We can just get it straight from the advertisers without the mediation. With that in mind I think it's necessary for media types to at least acknowledge that they get why this is important.

There's a larger cultural narrative about the role of the press that we've all absorbed from movies and newspapers and school that puts a premium on its value to society as an independent, largely impartial voice. If people want to place themselves outside of that narrative, whether it's fair or not, by default they risk calling into question their integrity. That's where a lot of this reaction is coming from - we all believe the press is, or should be, something in particular.

 

[krae_man]

Gamers do that all the time. Problem is not the environment PR created but simply that gamers live on hype. They spend more time anticipating and drooling over unreleased games than they do actually appreciating them after they come out.

We've even seen gamers complain when Garnett played an older game and tried to talk about it on the show, it was Assassin's Creed 2 I think. Again, the audience gets what it deserves.

Now, the environment created by PR certainly has an effect on things. For example, games like Medal of Honor would get absolutely zero attention if if they were put put out by Namco, or made available only on the Vita. It's as uninteresting as a game as it can get: a bad clone of a popular franchise.

When Ubisoft flies you to Rome or Boston to see their game it won't affect your opinion of it when judging what you see (other things will if you're not experienced, like the carefully crafted demo section), and you may actually be annoyed at the inconvenience and delays that it causes you. But regardless of all that, you can't ignore the clear message: this game is important. This automatically qualifies it for a one hour discussion on most podcasts, it will be a game of the year candidate at the VGA's and other awards and other crap like that.

For example, one of my top three games this year is LBP Vita and it didn't get any marketing or PR done for it, and it's been completely ignored on all but one podcast that I listen to, which also happens to be the one made by non industry professionals (that's P1P). So what makes a game worth discussing on a podcast: how novel it is, how good it is, how popular it is... it's a question worth asking for anyone that covers video games.

Another example: I've seen three people that played AC3 and AC3 Liberation already, and 3 out of 3 were more positive about the Vita game. What do you think are the chances of it rating better on Metacritic, even if it indeed turns out to be the better game?

I actually was able to go to an Assassins Creed 3/Liberation Launch Party in Toronto a couple weeks ago. It was Open bar and had awesome food. Press attending got a swag bag when they left too. Everything about the enviroment was created to try and influence the opinions of the press attending.

Also a couple weeks earlier while waiting in line for the Public portion of Sony Canada's holiday preview event I witnessed countless press leave then suddenly go "Oh crap I forgot my swag" or ask someone else "Hey where did you get that? I want that" then run back in to get their free stuff. The stuff they got, was better then the stuff Sony gave out to the public(Press got 1 year Plus cards, the public got one month cards for example). Why do you think that is?

It's true. The audience is complicit in this too. Just a couple of weeks ago we were all giving these guys grief for not being hyped enough about the Wii U. Riding the hype train is a big part of the fun of following gaming news, and we do tune in to podcasts like this one to get more current views from the inside of that train.

I seem to recall the WiiU backlash not being "How dare you say the WiiU Sucks. You're not allowed to have any opinion other then shiny new console is awesome and I want it" and more people pointing out flaws in their arguments. It wasn't "How dare you hate it" it was "your reason why you hate it makes no sense because X". Example: They complained about it only coming with one controller despite that's been the standard since forever. They also complained about it not being able to play Audio CD's. They complained about it not coming with Wiimotes, then in the next sentance said they each had a half dozen lying around the house, they called the Flash memory worse and cheap comparred to a traditional hard drive etc

 

[Deadstar]

The funny thing is Keighly clearly refers to himself as a journalist in his Twitter profile.

Saying "But but but we're not journalists! Why are you people getting so upset?!?" is a total cop out.


Saying we're upset because of jealousy is just infuriating.

I would speak for yourself. I'm sure there are tons of gamers working at fast food restaurants who would much rather be in Geoff's position, next to doritos or not. You may be living a great life, but there are many people who aren't.

 

[Massa]

I would speak for yourself. I'm sure there are tons of gamers working at fast food restaurants who would much rather be in Geoff's position, next to doritos or not. You may be living a great life, but there are many people who aren't.

A lot of people find the idea of getting free games and being able to play them before release exciting as hell, for the reasons we were discussing above. For example, this person is probably very jealous of Geoff Keighley:

Anyway, Geoff has chosen to be a TV presenter that promotes upcoming games on a weekly basis, leading up to the end year's show he organizes which is also about promoting future games. I don't like his job, and I extra don't like it because the dude is incredibly talented and could be doing something much more to my liking, but at the end of the day I don't really see anything wrong with it. Every industry has people like that, you just don't want the guy that has to act excited about an Army of Two sequel to be the one you get your opinions from.

 

[eznark]

So I just looked in the app store...Smart Glass isn't actually out on iOS yet right?

 

[Clear]

Sorry for the rant, but I'm finding this 'journalism' story really dumb. The point is talk about All Stars all you want, we know your relationship with it and I think I can trust myself enough to take your opinion with a pinch of salt.

To take this one step further, (and apologies for perhaps overemphasising this point):

YOU SHOULD TAKE ANY OPINION YOU READ/HEAR WITH A PINCH OF SALT.

This is because an opinion is just an opinion, not a fact. Its an anecdote, a personal view, not holy writ. If you choose to take it for more than that you are just being a fool to yourself.

I just wish more people would get this riled up about how potentially malign the influence of professional lobbyists are on our politics and democracy. That's a subject of real substance and import, "videogames journalism" is just trivia in comparison.

 

[bigdaddygamebot]

Garnett's been saying he's not a journalist for years, like eznark pointed out in this very thread. You can't use that as proof that he's copping out. He also addressed the issue on his show and will probably do it again next week, so how is that copping out? Not discussing it on GAF in a thread that is already hostile against him is not the same as ignoring it. In fact, right in the beginning of the show you can tell Andrea was worried about tackling the issue on-air, and Garnett's tone when he replied to that showed he was absolutely fine with addressing it.

Garnett has indeed saying just that for quite some time. I'm not one of the ones believing it to be a "cop out" on his part. I believe Garnett and respected his transparency. Now I could be foolish for believing him but in this case...I don't think my trust is misplaced.

Andrea's responses however...she really, truly has no clue.

It's a shame that in a few more years, individuals such as Garnett will be gone entirely with people like Andrea to fill his shoes.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

I wish andrew stopped saying like so much.

how many times is this dude going to say 'you know' in this episode? I feel like I'm closing in on 1000
its hard to pay attention to what he's saying