As I said in the John Walker thread, he's the most dishonest person in the gaming media.
-
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.
Bioshock "Exclusive Review" IGN edition - A lot of annoyed journos (Ironcreed wow).
- Thread starter unbias
- Start date
As I said in the John Walker thread, he's the most dishonest person in the gaming media.
Well I agree that everyone isnt just "in it for the money" but half the battle in making money, as a games media website, is creating a form of trust with your audience, so they keep coming back, because they look forward to what you are saying. If all they did, is get teh story out, no matter the cost, I dont think it would be a stretch to say readers would pick-up on it.
Money, readers/consumers, credibility and ect is all connected when it comes to running anything(games media or otherwise) to be financially and critically successful. I mean, games media isnt the only ones who have to deal with conflict of interest, money vs credibility and ect, so it seems a bit disingenuous to imply most dont understand the intricacies of creating a brand, that is financially successful(games media or otherwise).
What would happen if all of games media broke embargo's and just did what tehy wanted and when? I mean I get the argument that everyone would rush out to publisher a review, but I'm assuming the entire dynamic of publisher/media would change quite a bit, so the same examples wouldnt apply, I would think.
Yeah I agree. Like anyone he has misjudged and made bad decisions, but at the heart of it I like him. I also find The Doritos Pope name fantastic too;p
edit - I also think Geoff negotiating exclusive previews, interviews and trailers for GT is completely different to exclusive reviews.
GuitarAtomik
Member
The result is pretty much that last tweet. People would rush to be the first to post things since the first one out there is going to get the most clicks. This would de-prioritize well written, thought out reviews and encourage reviewers to rush through games as fast as possible which naturally would lead to a warped perspective of the games they're playing. This of course would make reviews less useful to consumers since it wouldn't be representative of the majority of use cases.
So all it would do is:
1] Force reviewers to compress their entire process in to an absurd amount of time so they can get the review out there as fast as possible.
2] Gives readers a warped opinion on a game that would be unrepresentative of what their own experience would most likely be.
No one wins in that scenario.
Which would probably break reviews... The news model, in regards to reviews would probably change to compensate. I would imagine 1st impressions and "lets play" type video's would get a lot more popular and needed, which would give the consumer/reader/viewer even more to go off of, then just words...perhaps.
If the media as whole did it, I'm not sure publishers would have a choice. Either way, I would think the same thing would happen. How teh media does reviews would probably change from word to video format, almost completely for 1st impressions and then finish the review later on. Honestly, I think that would be a good thing, because you would know those who jsut do a written review with a score, at launch probably rushed it.
CamHostage
Member
Yes, they are "in it for the money" in that it is their job and they like paying for rent and booze and hug pillows. They're just not in it for the big money like people think, no gaming journalist is filthy rich (at least not from being a gaming journalist.)
But also yes, credibility is a challenge when money is involved, no matter how honest you try to be. That's what people should take away in my opinion, that the concept of a "moneyhat" is preposterous, but the question of how influenced and biased your media is should always be in question, from the loftiest towers of mainstream news to the war trenches of indie press to the chuck-e-cheeses of video game writing.
Things wouldn't necessarily get better, if that's what you're asking. If you were around for the PS1/N64/DC era of gaming coverage, you saw the a time pretty much without embargoes, I personally don't feel the difference in content honesty but maybe somebody has more concrete examples of changes?
Killing embargoes would eliminate some of the pressure a publisher can put on a journalist, but only some, most of that pressure and influence is still there (remember that a PR rep's most dangerous weapon is not her legal papers, it is her booze expense budget.) And like I mentioned, there was a time when online embargoes weren't used much and websites ran like pirate ships, desperate to scoop each other by any means possible. For rabid news hounds, that could have been nice (there are people for example that must know the truth about Phantom Pain and could so break it and get away anonymously) but in the big picture, people like their E3 Megatons and they like their nicely laid out Game Informer 12-page first-looks and they like the Spike Awards to debut huge surprises. We don't want Variety announcing every hiring and firing on a project, telling us about every single pilot that has a 5% chance of ever seeing the light of day. The publishers, the journalists, and even the fans, we are all part of a silly game that works best if everybody plays fair and just believes...
With Facebook and Youtube and official sites and stuff like that, publishers do have a choice in not using the press. There's no press for Walking Dead: Survival Instincts, and I imagine that game will do OK. Call of Duty and WoW and GTA and Super Mario use the press very limitedly even though they are huge, journalists get invited to press events for hands-ons for big bumps but the in-between phases of coverage is sustained by blogs and social posts. For iPhone and Web games, they hardly have the option right now of approaching press because builds are difficult to provide, and press doesn't do well with casual games anyway so if you've got the next Angry Birds, better chances of catching virally on Youtube than in a review. It's all the stuff in the middle that publishers need the press, you can't bring out a Ni No Kuni for instance and hope that enough people love Miyazaki movies to buy the game. And it's the stuff that would be inappropriate on an official site, like opinions and game help and unusual coverage (even if your game is being made fun of, bad press is still press,) that the world still needs media for. But it's a shrinking need, and a media outlet would be foolish (and I'd personally say needlessly motivated, as my position is it is possible to run a media source both reasonably profitably and with reasonable integrity) to burn that bridge and break embargoes willingly.
As I said before you can argue this case.
Aliens Colonial Marines is a good a point and I said earlier its relevant for people who pre-order, Luckily it's very easy to cancel those.
This all comes to perception and I hold the opinion most people already regard previews with a level of suspicion because the product is unfinished. Regardless there will at least be some people who view previews as factually informative without questioning much of what is presented aside from asking what other features will be available. It sucks if they get hyped up in this matter but ultimately it is reviews that are there to inform. That's why the opinion on Alien Colonial Marines turned around so quickly in the first place.
The keypoint is that a review is for a product that you exchange money for.
With pre-orders you haven't exchanged anything, you just indicated an intent to do so.
That's why previews and and reviews are held to different standards. It's also why it is taboo for there to be exclusivity in reviews because the taint of being overly positive in previews is quite evident.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I wouldn't know if this is true or not, because I only read these soap operas, and none of their articles unless they are posted on GAF
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
HAPPY BIRTHDEW
CamHostage
Member
Heh, you have a point there ... but the funny thing is, you surprised me by calling me out on it, because from what I know, journalists don't seem to be under that pressure nearly as much as theorists assume they are. They're much, much, much, much more worried about their traffic and likes/+1s and reputation and portfolio-building and their schedule and their competition than they are any kind of wrath from a publisher. Anybody else who's currently a journalist on this thread who sees their job differently?
To be completely honest with you, I 100% believe the metascore-for-developer-bonus system is in place so that publishers can deny paychecks, it has nothing to do with the reviews themselves, it's just an excuse to not pay, an excuse publishers have been looking for as an out for years (same how movie studios say Star Wars and Clerks never "officially" turned a profit, it's all how you play the numbers) and only found a "legitimate" means to put it in a contract when GameRanking/MetaCritic came along.
*Do note, by the way, that it's not the PR agents or anybody that's actually putting this pressure on who don't get paid if the games don't sell, it's only the poor 3rd Party developers in the trenches!
**Also by the way, credit to developers as I don't know offhand if I've heard of a story of a developer actually putting pressure or blame on a specific journalist for their not getting a bonus. I think they know that it's a bullshit tactic that nobody involved has any real control over and that only the penny-pinchers who benefit from it.
Doug Heffernan
Member
Once again, Adam Sessler continues to be awesome.
When did being a hypocrite and liar make you awesome?
This game seems cursed.
...
How is it baffling if they get all the hits.
valentine71
Banned
Cross post from Bioshock Inifinte Thread:
Maybe you should ask why they are able to do this. Why they are able to? I mean Sony nearly always sends stuff that can work on certain firmwires (its called dex), so even if the reviewers sell it, hand it, it does no good to piracy. Maybe you should ask to PR departments of the companies why they send retail signed games to people. And instead of just standard promo disks why they send special boxes filled with goodies, retail copies and sometimes hotel invitations. Also maybe you should ask why they invite people to Miami to play preview builds as well. So many questions should be asked before that one. Maybe exclusive interviews and 9mbergoes should be asked too...
Edit:
The lack of integrity is on behalf of PR companies and the system as well.
Last Edit: This is the integrity of the PR companies as well as gaming journalists. I can add a hundred like this one if you would like me to. So before devs should talk about the press integrity they should talk about their producer's integrity on exclusive reviews and exclusive interviews as well... And maybe about their PR departments too.
Here is your INTEGRITY
Maybe you should ask why they are able to do this. Why they are able to? I mean Sony nearly always sends stuff that can work on certain firmwires (its called dex), so even if the reviewers sell it, hand it, it does no good to piracy. Maybe you should ask to PR departments of the companies why they send retail signed games to people. And instead of just standard promo disks why they send special boxes filled with goodies, retail copies and sometimes hotel invitations. Also maybe you should ask why they invite people to Miami to play preview builds as well. So many questions should be asked before that one. Maybe exclusive interviews and 9mbergoes should be asked too...
Edit:
The lack of integrity is on behalf of PR companies and the system as well.
Last Edit: This is the integrity of the PR companies as well as gaming journalists. I can add a hundred like this one if you would like me to. So before devs should talk about the press integrity they should talk about their producer's integrity on exclusive reviews and exclusive interviews as well... And maybe about their PR departments too.
Here is your INTEGRITY
Angry Fork
Member
If I was a reviewer I would feel really creeped out by gifts or free games/access, as it would quite clearly be bribery. Do people just not care about that in the game industry or are there some reviewers who don't take all the free shit/advertising?
Pachterballs
Banned
Captain Dorito.
Lmao
It's never going away is it.
Lmao
It's never going away is it.
The lack of integrity is on behalf of PR companies and the system as well.
Last Edit: This is the integrity of the PR companies as well as gaming journalists. I can add a hundred like this one if you would like me to. So before devs should talk about the press integrity they should talk about their producer's integrity on exclusive reviews and exclusive interviews as well... And maybe about their PR departments too.
Here is your INTEGRITY
I receive at least ten emails a week with promo codes in them and not only do I not write about games, but I've never reviewed a game in my life. I also receive music and blogger PR including thousands of MP3s I'll never listen to, so it's obviously not exclusive to games. I'm not really understanding what the issue with this is -- you can't force an outlet, or person, to cover your game, and it's publicity for the agency. Maybe someone will put their eyes on the game you're representing, pick it up down the road and decide to do a piece on it. I just don't see very many people that write about games professionally getting excited about an email like this. At best, the majority of people will either use the code and mess with the game for a few minutes or give the code away.
Angry Fork
Member
Didn't Geoff say he was going to write some article about all of that? Did he ever do so?
To be fair Totilo wrote a good piece over on Kotaku on why publisher embargo's are important after that Assassin's Creed IV fiasco with regards to reveals and previews. In the sense that the vast majority of reviews are from sites and not mags, exclusives are always going come under a vast amount of scrutiny.
Square Triangle
Member
He is too busy pissing people off by continuing what he has always done. True gangsta
Pachterballs
Banned
Sleeplessnights
Banned
What did Sessler do?
Edit: nvm
Edit: nvm
I didn't know where this was. Thanks to the Battlefield thread.
appropriate.
Heh, unfortunately with that GIF people sometimes get the wrong idea, that publishers are paying them off, when typically it is much mroe subtle then that. Publishers can apply pressure to outlets, that dont play ball or are antagonistic, as we found out with the Duke Nukem crap.
The money hat is too simplistic...however that gif is(or was the 1st time) kinda funny.
Very smart article: http://shanesatterfield.tumblr.com/post/45860566906/exclusive-video-game-reviews-no-easy-answer
Read the whole thing, but here are some important excerpts:
Read the whole thing, but here are some important excerpts:
I think the problem with that is that if *most* of the media do it, with one or two outlets holding out, those outlets would gain a heck of a lot in the long run.
Voice of Reason
Banned
What time will they release the review?
Apparently Thursday "night". Dont think it says what time.
ThisWreckage
Banned
Out of all entertainment mediums, gaming critiques rank as the most irrelevant. The general feeling I get is that there is enormous pressure on reviewers to rank high profile games within the 9.0-10.0 range. High profile albums and movies are given bad reviews all the time, but that type of thing is exceedingly rare in the gaming industry. So Sessler, Gies, and Geoff can act like that they're offended and that a great sin was committed, but they're just pissed that they weren't able to give the same exact score IGN is going to give the game first. That's what this outrage is truly about.
9pm Pacific.
While I agree with a lot of what he says, on the other hand he seems to over simplify certain aspects of how publishers(multimillion dollar companies) use pervasive tactics to create a positive or high pressure narrative that ultimately benefits them. The biggest sign to this fact is, despite all the game's media saying none of it really effects them, publishers keep doing it...which doesn't make a ton of sense. Although I doubt most are nefarious in intent, I do get the impression that a lot of games media thinks themselves more immune to such tactics then everyone else who has had to deal with favors to distort perception.
Pro from Dover
Member
Yeah. Can we have nice things again?
Sessler talks about the nature of exclusive reviews, in regards to the BioShock controversy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwP7XpBeEdA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwP7XpBeEdA
What's wrong with Geoff? because the whole chetos thing?
First: he's never been a reviewer
Second: he's done good stuff for game journalism trough his career
Internet thug-pack mentality... sometimes its just mean.
Similar threads
- Locked