-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos
- Thread starter papersleeves
- Start date
- Status
Which is why they demand feedback and express appreciation of it any chance they get. Somewhere along the way it got cringe-worthy.
Disclaimer: I'm not a games journalist, I hold the profession in low esteem, bar few exceptions (Retro Gamer are the only actual games journalists imo) and have zero interest in the Mass Effect series.
As a bystander during the whole Mass Effect ending saga, I noticed a LOT of reviewers calling gamers a bunch of whinging/entitled/infantile/juvenile/immature/insert-pejorative-here man children.
Combine that with the observation that a large number of games journalists are either suspect or cast in a suspicious light due to Doritos/PR masquerading as journalism, and it reeks very strongly of marketers insulting their audience for having the temerity to dislike the occasional over-hyped, mass-produced, design-by-committee, sterile 'interactive experience'.
The games industry is to blame for creating this environment; both by breeding unrealistic expectations and releasing generic rubbish. Not to mention the slap in the face the narrative conclusion ME3 was said to be by those who were fans of the series.
Those journalist/fan conflicts aside, don't you think it's possible that IGN's staff simply thought Mass Effect 3 was a great game?
I mean, if you don't want to agree with them or trust them, that's fine -- I always recommend that readers should find specific writers who they personally trust, then just follow those specific writers' work (which is why Twitter is so helpful) -- but to conclude that they must be taking bribes or sucking up to AAA developers just because they enjoyed the game is absurd.
I played around 10 hours of Mass Effect 3 and I thought it was very good. I've never been a huge fan of the series (I don't like sci-fi that much), but I enjoyed what I played. I can totally understand why some people fell in love with it, even if a lot of fans didn't. My personal GOTY pick (so far) is probably Virtue's Last Reward, which NOBODY played, but I'm not gonna get mad or scream "bribery" when it misses everyone's GOTY lists. I recognize that my taste is rather niche, and that AAA games will always have an advantage (as AAA products do in every industry).
Really, though, if you don't trust game reviewers, that's OK. Just try to ignore them. But if you do care about this sort of thing, and you do find yourself getting angry over review scores and GOTY lists and whatever, then the only way to keep your blood pressure down is to find specific people who you trust, even if you disagree with them sometimes.
That means paying more attention. That means looking at a writer's work and saying "oh wow, he does more actual original reporting than I thought anyone in game journalism did" or maybe saying "wow, he does nothing but aggregate other people and rewrite press releases all day." The more attention you pay, the more you'll start to notice just how good -- and just how sloppy -- different writers can be. And if you really care about this field, that's exactly what you should try to notice. Praise the good writers. Call out the sloppy ones. Pay attention to specifics, instead of condemning sites for their GOTY choices or screaming "lol game journalism" every chance you get. That's the only way to help make things better.
I mean, if you don't want to agree with them or trust them, that's fine -- I always recommend that readers should find specific writers who they personally trust, then just follow those specific writers' work (which is why Twitter is so helpful) -- but to conclude that they must be taking bribes or sucking up to AAA developers just because they enjoyed the game is absurd.
I played around 10 hours of Mass Effect 3 and I thought it was very good. I've never been a huge fan of the series (I don't like sci-fi that much), but I enjoyed what I played. I can totally understand why some people fell in love with it, even if a lot of fans didn't. My personal GOTY pick (so far) is probably Virtue's Last Reward, which NOBODY played, but I'm not gonna get mad or scream "bribery" when it misses everyone's GOTY lists. I recognize that my taste is rather niche, and that AAA games will always have an advantage (as AAA products do in every industry).
Really, though, if you don't trust game reviewers, that's OK. Just try to ignore them. But if you do care about this sort of thing, and you do find yourself getting angry over review scores and GOTY lists and whatever, then the only way to keep your blood pressure down is to find specific people who you trust, even if you disagree with them sometimes.
That means paying more attention. That means looking at a writer's work and saying "oh wow, he does more actual original reporting than I thought anyone in game journalism did" or maybe saying "wow, he does nothing but aggregate other people and rewrite press releases all day." The more attention you pay, the more you'll start to notice just how good -- and just how sloppy -- different writers can be. And if you really care about this field, that's exactly what you should try to notice. Praise the good writers. Call out the sloppy ones. Pay attention to specifics, instead of condemning sites for their GOTY choices or screaming "lol game journalism" every chance you get. That's the only way to help make things better.
Yes, that's possible. But given there is no reason to give benefit of the doubt thanks to the incredibly low standards gaming journalism is held to, its always going to be seen as a tainted vote.
Journalists have to earn credibility. So far, few have.
FWIW, I don't personally care what gets GOTY. I can't even think of a single game I'd vote for this year, so to me it's not even a point to consider. But the conflict of interest is blindingly obvious here: IGN writer has prominent role in game with large marketing budget, gives said game lots of preview attention and good review scores, calls out audience as being entitled when complaints hit, then gives it GOTY. That's going to rub people up the wrong way.
Perhaps an 'abstain' vote might have been appropriate.
You have been very open and honest in this Thread so thank you for that. I’ll have to ask you a question that’s slightly related, though.
Do you and your colleagues talk about your audience at all? I listen to a lot of gaming podcasts and I always get the impression that writers apprechiate that readers make sure the money flows in but continue to hate them.
They want you to comment, subscribe, follow or whatever but when they then go on to harvest the fruits of these things, they call their audience immature, entitled, crybabies and I feel like there’s generally just a lack of respect. Sometimes they go on and say “I know how many people have read this story and I know the people complaining about X or Y are in the minority”, wrongfully assuming that everyone who has a problem will also register and post about it just to prove their point.
Are there ever any discussions about how to treat your readership? It really feels to me like those people have forgotten that, while advertisers pay them directly, their readers are the one and only reason they can do the job they love.
Scarecrow
Member
That's because gamers pretty much are a bunch of whiny man children. Most outspoken nerds are. The ending to a video game pissed them off so much that they helped vote EA the worst company of the year. Worse than other such clearly rotten establishments like BoA, Paypal, AT&T and Verizon.
If I were a part of the game enthusiast press, I wouldn't want to fight for gamers either.
Making claims like this is really just an excuse for certain types (of games journalists) to make it easier to discredit those with legitimate complaints by lumping them in amongst the habitual whingers.
Who says gaming journalism is held to low standards? Who is holding game journalists to low standards? My boss certainly holds his staff to high standards. I set unrealistically high standards for myself every day.
While you are certainly entitled to say that journalists need to earn your trust, just how many journalists have you actually paid attention to? How many staff at Kotaku can you name? How many IGN writers do you know? How often do you read the bylines of reviews you read? How many game writer freelancers can you list offhand?
I totally get (and sympathize with) your skepticism, but how can you expect journalists to earn credibility in your eyes if you're not specifically paying attention to the work those journalists do?
If these issues really bother you -- and they certainly bother me -- then get educated on them. Maybe you'll say to yourself "okay, I won't trust Jessica Chobot again because she previewed a game she was in without disclosing that information." Or maybe you'll say to yourself, "wow, Simon Parkin sure writes some fantastic stories for Eurogamer, I should get him on my radar." Pay more attention to the specifics, to who is worth trusting and who isn't worth trusting in your eyes, and you'll be better for it.
Is this supposed to be a joke post or am I missing something? You’re not happy with the result because you feel another company deserved that title more. You’re doing the exact same thing those “whiny man children” get called out for all the time. Someone’s opinion is not the same as theirs so they complain about it. They’re doing it, you’re doing it as well.
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
To me just because there are apparently ethical writers at one outlet, doesn't excuse the place from having bad ones. Of the places you listed I don't trust them as a whole because they allow for shitty journalism and unprofessionalism. If you want me to start remembering credible writers, clean house on all the crap, revamp and openly state your professional guidelines and adhere to them. Until then I'll keep ignoring those websites and the garbage they publish.
I'm going to assume there is a lot of turnover of staff at gaming sites. So I'll happily admit there are probably a lot of journalists I'm painting with broad brushstrokes here. It's great that you're willing to engage with the discussion at least.
But IGN, Kotaku, Joystiq, 1up/EGM, Gamespot etc have all long since blown their credibility as far as I'm concerned, and they did that years and years ago. Maybe as long as a decade ago in some cases. I couldn't even remember why, in many cases. Driver 3 comes to mind. Kane and Lynch too.
I've got plenty of places to find news - GAF, Retro Gamer, Edge, Eurogamer (they stomp on thin ice regularly though). It's thanks to the sensationalistic types of writers that I've long since learnt not to bother visiting mostly US sites like the ones you listed. It's like reading anything, say a newspaper. If you stop reading it and find you don't miss it, you don't bother coming back. To me, that's how it is with a LOT of gaming sites thanks to losing trust in their impartiality over the years.
It's an easy thing to lose and a very difficult thing to regain.
Jason, I understand how hard it is to be a game journalist. In my family, my brother is a music journalist and my mother used to work with marketing. I was in a gaming blog before I went for the developer side (mostly we translated news and, for stories discovered by one site specifically, we would quote the source). We also did our own previews, reviews and interviews and I always thought about how it's difficult to find a mid-term between being excited about a title (because it's an entertainment industry) and not compromise your article. But I love to read nowadays investigative articles and demanding reviews because I think it forces developers to do better. At least, if I saw an article about my game, I'd see it that way.
Since you're asking my personal perspective, I'll speak personally. Have you ever gotten the impression from me that I hate my audience? Have you ever got that impression from anyone at Kotaku?
I'm not perfect, and I've certainly been nasty to readers before (and yes, even dropped the e-bomb once or twice), but I genuinely appreciate everyone who follows my work, and everyone who reads Kotaku. To the point where I'll push myself extra hard on a Friday afternoon just to crank out my JRPG column, even when I'd rather be doing other things or coasting to the weekend, just because I know how much Kotaku readers enjoy it.
One of the things I've noticed is that many games writers write as if they're talking to developers, or other people working in the gaming industry. One of the things that we do at Kotaku is try very hard to write like we're talking to gamers. We definitely have our flaws -- and we will definitely continue to do things that many people will inevitably disagree with -- but I don't think being nasty to our audience is one of them.
Just to add one more thing - I'm very picky. I'm a true cynic, in every sense of the word. I've learnt enough lessons over time that overhyping anything only leads to disappointment. That's probably why I'm so quick to dimiss the thoughts and opinions of most mainstream gaming sites and blogs: you all seem to hype everything up to eleven. And it's almost always games from the same four publishers.
Everything that is except the small, undiscovered yet immensely enjoyable games. When I've read sites like ign/1up etc, I just feel like I'm being advertised to. Conversely, when I read Retro Gamer, I feel like I'm being informed by someone with a passion for the medium and no sales or tie in marketing to achieve.
Everything that is except the small, undiscovered yet immensely enjoyable games. When I've read sites like ign/1up etc, I just feel like I'm being advertised to. Conversely, when I read Retro Gamer, I feel like I'm being informed by someone with a passion for the medium and no sales or tie in marketing to achieve.
Do you think it is fair for people to come into a thread like this and say "ugh I hate Kotaku's shitty journalism they have no credibility" when those people haven't read Kotaku in years, and don't know that we have a new EIC and that half the current staff only started in 2011-2012? Do you think it's fair to a writer like me, who started at Kotaku this year and has done a pretty good job (I think) writing interesting things, breaking news, and reporting tons of original stories?
If you guys are all getting up in arms about a field that you don't even read, how are we supposed to take you seriously? If you're willing to generalize and say things like "game journalism is mostly shitty" or "Kotaku is awful" when you don't actually pay attention to the specifics, know that you're part of the problem.
Not really. If a large proportion of the industry is complicit in marketing, that's their fault that people like you are being tarred with the same brush.
To add: I do read the field, but I've narrowed down that which I care about to a limited number of sources who have been honest and trustworthy for years. And as Dr Feel Good below says, a lot of the content from ign etc is absolute drivel which gets copied to gaf and reblogged elsewhere. Maybe that's confirmation bias, but I rarely see good writing from any of those sites when linked on GAF. Conversely, as I said above - magazines like Retro Gamer do actual journalism that is not tainted by real or possible conflicts of interest.
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
Do I go to Kotaku on a regular basis? No. But I come here enough to see important work published by you guys as well as the threads making fun of your site for awful articles as well. From that perspective the junk outweighs the gems.
Plus wasn't kotaku the site at the beginning of this shit storm that said they had better things to report about the problem and then did some unboxing video?
If you would like to stick your fingers in your ears and scream "game journalism sucks Kotaku sucks I can't hear you nyah nyah nyah" then by all means be my guest.
But if you want things to change, I recommend paying much more attention to the specifics. Read big gaming sites every day. Follow game journalists on Twitter. Pinpoint exactly what the big websites and writers do right every day and what they do wrong every day, and then discuss those things, both good and bad. Participate in the ongoing conversation.
If this is a topic you're interested in - and if you're reading this thread, it probably is - you'll find it quite illuminating to pay attention to the specifics of where news comes from, how different sites aggregate different things, which sites are willing to just post any random rumor with little to no vetting, which sites do original stories and which sites just rewrite press releases all day, etc.
Those are the sort of conversations I'd love to see. They're the conversations that make journalists better. As opposed to "I don't read this website because game journalism sucks" or "Kotaku does nothing but shitty journalism" or any of the other sweeping statements that make some of my colleagues call me a moron for continuing to post in this thread.
But if you want things to change, I recommend paying much more attention to the specifics. Read big gaming sites every day. Follow game journalists on Twitter. Pinpoint exactly what the big websites and writers do right every day and what they do wrong every day, and then discuss those things, both good and bad. Participate in the ongoing conversation.
If this is a topic you're interested in - and if you're reading this thread, it probably is - you'll find it quite illuminating to pay attention to the specifics of where news comes from, how different sites aggregate different things, which sites are willing to just post any random rumor with little to no vetting, which sites do original stories and which sites just rewrite press releases all day, etc.
Those are the sort of conversations I'd love to see. They're the conversations that make journalists better. As opposed to "I don't read this website because game journalism sucks" or "Kotaku does nothing but shitty journalism" or any of the other sweeping statements that make some of my colleagues call me a moron for continuing to post in this thread.
ClosingADoor
Member
I get all the complaints about the games press, but as Jason says, it isn't one websites fault that others are doing bad work. If a majority of television stations are crappy shows, are you still going to ignore a great HBO show for example?
Being in the field myself, it gets tiring to constantly battle the accusations of bribery and corruption, while you are just trying to do a good job for your readers and viewers. I don't mind readers being cautious and criticising me, they have every right to and it's my job to deliver quality (and entertaining) content. But if most of these accusations don't go further then 'game X doesn't deserve this rating, you must be bribed' or 'you must hate company X for giving this game a low score' and likewise screams, it starts to get annoying because there isn't a discussion to have there.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
This thread stopped being productive and slipped into parody a few pages ago
And the respective threads on GAF for those two awards were dominated by people arguing that they are not games.
Dr. Feel Good
Banned
You lost my hits, and revenue gained from me as a reader when you published substandard, unethical work. You have to earn that back, I'm not simply going to keep letting your site recognize me as an active, regular user when I have no desire to be one. I shouldn't have to watch, digest, articulate, and invest my time into what is good or bad journalism and call you out when I see either or. Put up 100% good content, not influenced by the studios or PR, something your site should have been doing from fucking day 1, and maybe you gain my readership again. Until then I'll keep my distance, thank you very much.
Are you really going to keep speaking in these ridiculous generalizations? Your accusations that my site publishes "substandard, unethical work" or things that are "influenced by the studios or PR" are meaningless to me without specifics. You're complaining without telling anyone what you're complaining about, which has unfortunately become par for the course in this thread.
I've bolded the particularly standout sentences in this post. Firstly, if all you get out of my post is "nyah nyah games journalism sucks" then you are doing the exact same thing you are accusing others of doing in this thread. Stop it. I've explained myself.
Secondly, your appeals to people to 'join the conversation' and read/pay attention to/follow games journalists you trust. I do that already - I subscribe to Retro Gamer and Edge. My money is where my mouth is, I trust those publications and I trust them to inform the reader. I don't follow/read/subscribe to magazines like EGM or Gamepro or CVG because they lost that trust a long time ago, same with blogs like yours, joystiq etc.
Of course there are going to be staff changes and good writers at historically poor outlets. But there are only so many hours in the day to read this stuff, and I'm 100% more likely to go where I know good writing exists, rather than take a chance on a place where I know sensationalistic rubbish has been written routinely in the past.
It's a shame you have fallen into the pattern of blaming the consumer - everyone is making bad comments about games writing so therefore it must be the readers' fault for the general perception of low quality games journalism. It's not the reader's fault - it's a problem with the field that has been brewing for a long time thanks to people like Totilo/Chobot/Keighley/that guy who danced with Skyrim last year etc. Those are the people earning games journalism a poor reputation - take it up with them and have the discussion with them instead of lecturing the potential audience about how 'you've got it all wrong!'.
You are missing the point.
You don't want to read Kotaku because of something we did in the past? Fine. I'm not here to solicit GAF for readers. You all wind up coming to our site more than enough anyway, because the news we break is linked here so often.
But it's asinine for you to sit here and talk about how Kotaku is an example of shitty journalism or how Stephen Totilo is "earning games journalism a bad reputation" when you admit that you haven't read the site in years. And it's even more asinine that you continue to waste everyone's time by refusing to bring up specific examples of what you see as the problem with Kotaku or sites like it.
When I talk about conversation, I am talking about having a conversation in this thread. About specifics. About details. How does it help anyone for you to continue to regurgitate the same talking points again and again?
You don't want to read Kotaku because of something we did in the past? Fine. I'm not here to solicit GAF for readers. You all wind up coming to our site more than enough anyway, because the news we break is linked here so often.
But it's asinine for you to sit here and talk about how Kotaku is an example of shitty journalism or how Stephen Totilo is "earning games journalism a bad reputation" when you admit that you haven't read the site in years. And it's even more asinine that you continue to waste everyone's time by refusing to bring up specific examples of what you see as the problem with Kotaku or sites like it.
When I talk about conversation, I am talking about having a conversation in this thread. About specifics. About details. How does it help anyone for you to continue to regurgitate the same talking points again and again?
OK, so go ahead and show us some examples that support all of the accusations you've been making so far. When do we run content that you think is driven by PR? What have we done that has gotten you to the point where you think I'm bad at my job? It is worthless to everyone when you say that the editor-in-chief of Kotaku is giving the whole field a bad reputation but you won't explain just what he's done that is so heinous.
I didnt say you were bad at your job. I said I have a lack of trust in your site because of things done in the past. I also said several times that I appreciate staff changes occur. I haven't read kotaku (aside from the odd linked story on gaf) for over a year or two, which is before your time.
I get it - you are just after an easy way to discredit all I say because I cannot post a specific example. I said on my first posts on the matter that it happened years ago, and I've had more important and interesting things to remember since then.
If pushed for an answer, I'd still say the circling of the wagons over the thread title incident (and not having anything to say about it) might qualify, but this is a lack of trust built up over years thanks to countless trivial and banal articles. Apparently your site has a timely article on end of the world gamer confessions. I could quote the subtitle on that as an easy example I guess.
I get it - you are just after an easy way to discredit all I say because I cannot post a specific example. I said on my first posts on the matter that it happened years ago, and I've had more important and interesting things to remember since then.
If pushed for an answer, I'd still say the circling of the wagons over the thread title incident (and not having anything to say about it) might qualify, but this is a lack of trust built up over years thanks to countless trivial and banal articles. Apparently your site has a timely article on end of the world gamer confessions. I could quote the subtitle on that as an easy example I guess.
Discredit what you say? No, I'm trying to do quite the opposite. I'm trying to get you to prove your point because I'm sick of your baseless mud flinging. Here's what you said:
How is Totilo, the editor-in-chief of Kotaku, earning games journalism a poor reputation? Prove your point.
Since the JRPG article you do, you mentioned above, I would like to say while I don't visit Kotaku that much, I always look at your JRPG articles when I see them on FB/twitter. Being a JRPG fan, I can't resist (though I remember getting frustrated at something in the last one but I forget why now...)
Just thought I'd say something nice considering the threads slightly hostile nature.
Just thought I'd say something nice considering the threads slightly hostile nature
.Since the JRPG article you do, you mentioned above, I would like to say while I don't visit Kotaku that much, I always look at your JRPG articles when I see them on FB/twitter. Being a JRPG fan, I can't resist (though I remember getting frustrated at something in the last one but I forget why now...)
Just thought I'd say something nice considering the threads slightly hostile nature
I appreciate that - thank you. The column can be rather draining sometimes, but I keep doing it because I know a lot of our readers enjoy it.
Perhaps I was mistaken, I can't find any examples. I will just leave it that my opinion of kotaku was formed years ago and its impossible to find specific links.
Gaming journalists have less expertise then some of the posters on gaf, only know the things they are told by the gaming firms themselves and no more and their reviews are more often factually false and biased then not. On top of the general incompetency and irrelevancy they now also seem to be corrupt.... I dont really understand why there is gaming journalists at all and why anyone should pay attention to them
Sir, its your job to maintain an image that you are not corrupt and not incompetent by general conduct on your every day work and not a internet forum posters job to proove that in fact you are. We are not prosecutors that need ro prove your guilt. We are consumers that are free to ignore your publication without stating a reason.
Sir, its your job to maintain an image that you are not corrupt and not incompetent by general conduct on your every day work and not a internet forum posters job to proove that in fact you are. We are not prosecutors that need ro prove your guilt. We are consumers that are free to ignore your publication without stating a reason.
Well there was that terrible article that was written about this very thread that slated people wanting higher standards and even managed to fit in a few lies about Wainwright not reviewing any Squenix games.
Speaking of specific examples of kotaku losing credibility didn't the sit publish a rumor flat out saying Versus was cancelled with details from their "sources" and it turned out to be completely wrong?
Actually, that might even get a pass from me, but then IGN took the rumor and portrayed it as q cold fact, with their "Report: FF Versus 13 cancelled" headline.
Also IGN giving RPG of the year to ME 3, the most controversial game of the year, which they even themselves admitted to being the less RPG than the other installments in the series is really ridiculous.
Actually, that might even get a pass from me, but then IGN took the rumor and portrayed it as q cold fact, with their "Report: FF Versus 13 cancelled" headline.
Also IGN giving RPG of the year to ME 3, the most controversial game of the year, which they even themselves admitted to being the less RPG than the other installments in the series is really ridiculous.
So true. The same reviewer can end up reviewing sports games, platformers, fpses, etc.
Moreover, do they even enjoy playing games when they have to play them in order to be able to pay the rent and put food in their mouths?
there was a post a while back about how some game journos at some event actually talked about games when not in the public eye, and they just shat on them. Then when stuff went up on the sites, guess what, positivity!
1) Did it really turn out to be completely wrong? When was the last time you saw Final Fantasy Versus XIII?
We reported that the game had either been cancelled or turned into Final Fantasy XV, and Square has not done a single thing to disprove that. Their president tweeted that it's still in production, yes. Because executives of big corporations never lie to protect their financial interests.
2) When Wada did tweet that, we immediately updated the story accordingly, as we always do. When we're wrong, we are happy to suck it up and admit to our mistakes for the sake of telling the truth.
And by the way, if you won't read outlets that are sometimes wrong, you should stay away from all newspapers, magazines, and websites. Have you seen the New York Times' corrections page? Every day they publish a giant list of all the facts they got wrong and mistakes they made in the previous day's paper.
3) How about all of the rumors we've reported based on "sources" that turned out to be true?
Like the fact that GTAV is set in LA with multiple protagonists, over a year before that news came out? http://kotaku.com/5853279/grand-theft-auto-v-will-be-set-in-los-angeles-may-star-multiple-characters
Or the new Xbox's codename? http://kotaku.com/5885539/the-next-xbox-is-code+nameddurango
Or the new PlayStation's codename? http://kotaku.com/5896996/the-next-playstation-is-called-orbis-sources-say-here-are-the-details
The list goes on and on.
Again, this sort of post is useless to everyone without specifics. Who are you talking about? What reviewers cover genres that they don't understand? What journalists lied to their readers after preview events?
As someone who would never, ever intentionally lie to my readers, I'm disgusted that you're sweeping me into this category of lying journalists without even trying to back up the accusations you're making.
Oh for god's sake, this info is so well-known and prevalent you are expected to know some examples yourself, and if you don't then you show a stunning lack of self-awareness for your choice of trade.
IGN's sports game editor covering the latest Championship Manager and complaining it was all managing teams and you hardly played football at all. Review ended up being pulled. You really weren't aware of that event?
You are correct. It is indeed my job to maintain that image, and that's what I try to do every day. As a reader, you are entitled to trust whoever you want.
But this is a conversation. This is one human being talking to other human beings. And when some of you sit here and spew generalizations about the state of game journalism without getting into specifics or backing up the accusations you make, how is that conversation supposed to happen? How am I supposed to take a complaint about Kotaku seriously when the complainer can't even bring up a single example that backs up what he's saying?
In other words, if you want this thread to be a forum for discussion about the issues surrounding game journalism and not just a circlejerk where you all repeat the same sweeping statements ad infinitum, start getting into specifics.
No? Link?
And the "I'm going to make a complaint but not bring up examples because you're expected to know them yourself" argument doesn't work for me. Sorry. I've been to plenty of preview events, and I've never intentionally lied to my readers after any of them.
CambriaRising
Member
I feel like jschreier is getting a lot of undue flack for things he didn't even do...
Jesus H
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=344523
This is like entering the current gun debates in the OT and demanding everyone give specific examples of incidents with guns. How can you be this ignorant of your own industry? How have you managed to even take part in this thread without knowing this stuff?
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
A game series written by ex-games journalists winning GOTY as voted for by other games journalists disproves conflicts of interest between games journalists?
Okay.
Please do.
And that was just one of the many, many well-known example of what Bunny was talking about. Why are gaffers so much more knowledgeable on stuff than the people actually paid to cover it?
CambriaRising
Member
You are being unnecessarily hostile. Calm down dude.
It has become rather clear that Jackpot - like some others in this thread - is less interested in having a conversation and more interested in reinforcing his preconceived notions about a group of people that, for whatever reason, he really wants to hate.
If anyone is interested in actually discussing specific ethical issues or incidents, let me know and maybe we can turn this into a productive discussion.
If anyone is interested in actually discussing specific ethical issues or incidents, let me know and maybe we can turn this into a productive discussion.
- Status