Support NeoGAF

[Moobabe]

It's all pretty suspect, but with game previews there's a lot more "controlled" aspects to it. With movies and tv shows, you can watch it at home on your computer and make your own conclusions and most articles about these things are subjective and usually state facts like when the movie is coming out, who stars, etc. With games, we have no access other than videos carefully curated. Sometimes we get to see a journalist play through the game. But it's all so fake and careful and smoke and mirrors.

It's not just a games issue for sure, but that's not an excuse.

There's an embargo up on Thursday afternoon (GMT) for Paragon - happy to talk about that event after that time but I can assure you it wasn't much like the events you're thinking of.

And game previews can absolutely be subjective - release date, cost, microtransactions, DLC, player count, systems etc without offering comment on whether they "like it" or not.

 

[Makonero]

Well depends on the game of course. What you describe mainly only applies to AAA. For many indie games, most sites only have a trailer, press kit, and development blog to go on (so basically the same as reporting on movies but more transparent and informative.) Plus many indie games have free alphas/betas. demos, prototypes publicly available


Let's be honestly, if you're revealing your game for the first time for the millions of people of the internet to learn about, well yeah, you're going to want to be careful and put your best foot forward

There's a difference between developers trying to force a certain perspective about a broken and bad game through manipulative means and developers showing off their game for the first time in the best possible light

Personally I feel your perspective is kind of cynical and jaded

I just want better discourse and better journalism, and if that means I'm cynical and jaded, so be it.

There's an embargo up on Thursday afternoon (GMT) for Paragon - happy to talk about that event after that time but I can assure you it wasn't much like the events you're thinking of.

And game previews can absolutely be subjective - release date, cost, microtransactions, DLC, player count, systems etc without offering comment on whether they "like it" or not.

I'm sure that most events are perfectly on the level. I'm just jaded and cynical.

 

[hodgy100]

I'd say do away with previews altogether and report on the game once it is out and can be played.

That's an awful idea. Mindshare drops and then no one (or at least a much smaller percentage of people) buys your game because they don't know it exists.

 

[Makonero]

That's an awful idea. Mindshare drops and then no one (or at least a much smaller percentage of people) buys your game because they don't know it exists.

Journalists aren't marketers. It's not their job to ensure that your game sells.

 

[The Foul]

I just want better discourse and better journalism, and if that means I'm cynical and jaded, so be it.
I'm sure that most events are perfectly on the level. I'm just jaded and cynical.

Personally I'd say you think for yourself and question what you are reading, which is perfectly healthy and evidence of strong character. "Jaded and cynical" are easy insults. Horses for courses, if you think what you're reading looks & smells like horseshit, you don't have to eat it up to know for sure, if people will call you jaded and cynical for not eating it, so be it.

I gave up on games media ages ago, even aspects of this site, it gets increasingly harder to tell what is opinion and what is PR regurgitation. Call that what you will, I just play video games.

 

[More_Badass]

Journalists aren't marketers. It's not their job to ensure that your game sells.

Why do you think one write about upcoming games? Perhaps it's because a game looks fun or interesting or unique and they're excited about it and want people to know about those games.

While I guess you could say that's marketing, it's really just people who like games and want more people to know about those games.

That's really all it is. It's really no different from me making a thread on NeoGAF about a game because I think it looks interesting and deserves some more attention.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

Unless it's a real small organization, standard operating procedure on previews and reviews is not to have the same person do both. This is also the case for things like movies.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

"Game B is like Game X meets Game Y" is the laziest form of writting, even if it's correct sometimes.

 

[vcc]

Last time I linked something to criticize, I was informed privately that I had made enemies by calling out specific people. I'd rather not sabotage what little space I've carved out for myself by making people feel bad, if I can help it?

If linking stuff is absolutely, completely mandatory, then I'll simply exit the thread instead.

EDIT: I will link positive stuff tho. Gimme a bit.

Being black balled from a industry that pays poorly, has terrible hours, rarely has benefits, has no job security, and has a unending stream of borderline insane critics who jump on you for liking the wrong thing, not liking the wrong thing or talking about stuff they don't like. hmm.. Doesn't sound that threatening? You need to really love the work to do it. It sounds like terrible jobs.

 

[Makonero]

Why do you think one write about upcoming games? Perhaps it's because a game looks fun or interesting or unique and they're excited about it and want people to know about those games.

While I guess you could say that's marketing, it's really just people who like games and want more people to know about those games.

That's really all it is. It's really no different from me making a thread on NeoGAF about a game because I think it looks interesting and deserves some more attention.

Those are perfectly valid reasons to write about games. But not good reasons to simply repeat PR phrases in the form of an article. I appreciate honest appraisals of games no matter the source, but when a company, small or large, controls the narrative to the degree where everyone talking about it uses the same unique language, I get concerned. It's not a journalist's job to get swept up in hype, no matter how excited they get. They can report on things they are excited about but I believe they should still remain conscious of their biases and open about them. And they should be original and not rely on PR pieces.

 

[More_Badass]

Those are perfectly valid reasons to write about games. But not good reasons to simply repeat PR phrases in the form of an article. I appreciate honest appraisals of games no matter the source, but when a company, small or large, controls the narrative to the degree where everyone talking about it uses the same unique language, I get concerned. It's not a journalist's job to get swept up in hype, no matter how excited they get. They can report on things they are excited about but I believe they should still remain conscious of their biases and open about them. And they should be original and not rely on PR pieces.

If sites are writing about an upcoming game like, say...Clustertruck, this is the available info

http://www.landfallgamestudio.com/clustertruck-1
https://www.youtube.com/user/Mrwilnyl/videos
https://twitter.com/LandfallGames/media

That's what all the sites are going to use. That "same unique language" isn't something shady or some kind of controlled narrative. It's what happens when you're all using the same info that's presented in the same way.

 

[Makonero]

If sites are writing about an upcoming game like, say...Clustertruck, this is the available info

http://www.landfallgamestudio.com/clustertruck-1
https://www.youtube.com/user/Mrwilnyl/videos
https://twitter.com/LandfallGames/media

That's what all the sites are going to use. That "same unique language" isn't something shady or some kind of controlled narrative. It's what happens when you're all using the same info that's presented in the same way.

You don't have to use "official" language. My argument isn't that you can't use video or facts about the game, but to use the developer description, IE "Xcom meets Dota!!!!" is not only lazy, but dangerous. Put some thought into the article, even if it's subjective. Copy/pasting press releases is garbage.

 

[More_Badass]

You don't have to use "official" language. My argument isn't that you can't use video or facts about the game, but to use the developer description, IE "Xcom meets Dota!!!!" is not only lazy, but dangerous. Put some thought into the article, even if it's subjective. Copy/pasting press releases is garbage.

What makes you think that's the developer's description?

XCOM meets DOTA doesn't appear anywhere on the game's website or any of their social media blurbs.

- The Gamespot preview doesn't mention DOTA and only references XCOM as a gameplay comparison

I approached it like I might a game of XCOM, in which I can see the enemy's move before my own

- The pcgamesn preview only mentions DOTA in the title, and describes the game as mixing "XCOM and a MOBA".
- Polygon's article uses XCOM in the title, and only mentions DOTA to give an example of what the turn-based gameplay is reminiscent of; it doesn't even mention XCOM in the actual article

It isn't the developer's description or "official language". It isn't money changing hands or some marketing script. It's just sites needing a pithy interesting title that quickly describes a game in few words and "X meets Y" is the fastest way to do that with titles.

But I do have to agree about copying/pasting. Whenever I write about games, I always paraphrase.

 

[Makonero]

What makes you think that's the developer's description?

XCOM meets DOTA doesn't appear anywhere on the game's website or any of their social media blurbs.

- The Gamespot preview doesn't mention DOTA and only references XCOM as a gameplay comparison

- The pcgamesn preview only mentions DOTA in the title, and describes the game as mixing "XCOM and a MOBA".
- Polygon's article uses XCOM in the title, and only mentions DOTA to give an example of what the turn-based gameplay is reminiscent of; it doesn't even mention XCOM in the actual article

It isn't the developer's description or "official language". It isn't money changing hands or some marketing script. It's just sites needing a pithy interesting title that quickly describes a game in a few characters and "X meets Y" is the fastest way to do that with titles.

But I do have to agree about copying/pasting. Whenever I write about games, I always paraphrase.

Okay, fair enough, it's lazy journalism. I'm still not convinced that a lot of sites aren't basically more than PR mouthpieces for the companies they cover, independent or otherwise. I'm just paranoid about similar language showing up after the whole thing about Hillary's PR team blackmailing the press into using her wording for things. It may not be a cabal or anything super heinous, but it doesn't help me to trust these sites either that they all use similar jargon.

 

[More_Badass]

Okay, fair enough, it's lazy journalism. I'm still not convinced that a lot of sites aren't basically more than PR mouthpieces for the companies they cover, independent or otherwise. I'm just paranoid about similar language showing up after the whole thing about Hillary's PR team blackmailing the press into using her wording for things. It may not be a cabal or anything super heinous, but it doesn't help me to trust these sites either that they all use similar jargon.

You think independent developers have the money or power to make sites act as PR mouthpieces for them? You know how common it is for indie devs to just be completely ignored by sites when they reach out for a review or preview? It happens all the time.

Now the big publishers, sure, I have the same doubts and caution that I imagine anyone who's been following games for the past few years would have

 

[Pixieking]

Slightly stretching the definition of "journalism", there's some good work done by the dev of Death Ray Manta, Rob Fearon. It's a smaller blog (yes, I read the OP, but bear with me ), but it covers a lot of ground that the larger sites really ought to look at, but don't. He's recently written about Steam key giveaway sites and user reviews and the use of publishers.

Both of those pieces are written by a dev and aimed at devs, but gaming (and by extension, gaming journalism) has a weird closeness to creators that's only seen elsewhere in the comics industry. We not only want to see how the sausage is made, but we want to know how well it sold in its first week, and how many are eating it at this very moment. So at what point does an otherwise informative piece become useless to us, the consumer (or the average Joe)? Are those two pieces above irrelevant, because they're not aimed at us, or are they very relevant, because it's highlighting something we didn't previously know? And if it's the latter, should we want more devs writing for and about the industry?

 

[More_Badass]

Slightly stretching the definition of "journalism", there's some good work done by the dev of Death Ray Manta, Rob Fearon. It's a smaller blog (yes, I read the OP, but bear with me ), but it covers a lot of ground that the larger sites really ought to look at, but don't. He's recently written about Steam key giveaway sites and user reviews and the use of publishers.

Both of those pieces are written by a dev and aimed at devs, but gaming (and by extension, gaming journalism) has a weird closeness to creators that's only seen elsewhere in the comics industry. We not only want to see how the sausage is made, but we want to know how well it sold in its first week, and how many are eating it at this very moment. So at what point does an otherwise informative piece become useless to us, the consumer (or the average Joe)? Are those two pieces above irrelevant, because they're not aimed at us, or are they very relevant, because it's highlighting something we didn't previously know? And if it's the latter, should we want more devs writing for and about the industry?

Why would it ever be irrelevant? Devs (if they can write well) are easily the most qualified people to write about games IMO. They can analyze and critique games with a knowledgable eye that a regular journalist just doesn't have, discuss the more subtle intricacies of game design, and are a primary source for areas like dealing with publishers and such

It's like Neil Degrasse Tyson writing about a new space discovery versus a regular reporter writing about the same topic

 

[PtM]

Headline: "SGDQ Speedrunner's 3DS Dies During Live Run of New Super Mario Bros 2."

 

[Brad Grenz]

"Gamer Paying 3DS for Charity, and What Happens Next Will Break Your Heart!" <== That sucks.

 

[PtM]

Wait, how is this bad? It says exactly what happened, and then the article gives more details. Exactly what you want from a headline.

Comment section is full with people who read someone had died. I for one wouldn't have clicked if I hadn't misread, because frankly, it's a non-story.

So how is that the article's fault? That's a problem with people's reading comprehension

okay.

Hahahaha this is the funniest thing ever. How can you complain about a headline you misread? Regardless of how you feel about an article's content you can't really call it bad just because you didn't read the headline correctly.

I'll call it "unfortunate".

 

[More_Badass]

Comment section is full with people who read someone had died. I for one wouldn't have clicked if I hadn't misread, because frankly, it's a non-story.

So how is that the article's fault? That's a problem with people's reading comprehension

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Comment section is full with people who read someone had died. I for one wouldn't have clicked if I hadn't misread, because frankly, it's a non-story.

okay.

Hahahaha this is the funniest thing ever. How can you complain about a headline you misread? Regardless of how you feel about an article's content you can't really call it bad just because you didn't read the headline correctly.

 

[Neuromancer]

PtM initially I misread it as well, but rereading it I spotted my own mistake. I'm not sure it qualifies here.

 

[duckroll]

PtM initially I misread it as well, but rereading it I spotted my own mistake. I'm not sure it qualifies here.

Sure it does. Gamers misreading headlines and getting upset over nothing is definitely an ugly part of games journalism!

 

[RockTurtle]

does the whole pewdiepie FTC fiasco count? he tore pretty harshly into polygon by linking his paid sponsorships to the whole cs:go gambling issue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JqJDRkKlt8&feature=youtu.be

 

[Geek]

does the whole pewdiepie FTC fiasco count? he tore pretty harshly into polygon by linking his paid sponsorships to the whole cs:go gambling issue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JqJDRkKlt8&feature=youtu.be

This was from a recent story about the FTC ruling there was unclear disclosure on the part of PDP and others that mentioned a couple other stories about Youtubers' lack of disclosure. The story is about Warner Bros., not PewDiePie, but I understand why he wouldn't want to be associated with the CSGO gambling folks either.

 

[PtM]

does the whole pewdiepie FTC fiasco count? he tore pretty harshly into polygon by linking his paid sponsorships to the whole cs:go gambling issue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JqJDRkKlt8&feature=youtu.be

Yes. It's bad journalism about PDP, possibly even ugly. I agree with his video on it.
Mostly.
I can see both sides.

 

[PtM]

Here's the Polygon story: http://www.polygon.com/2016/7/11/12149350/warner-bros-shadow-of-mordor-youtube-ftc-settlement

Maybe I'm missing something but it seems pretty spot on.

A disclosure buried in the description box is exactly what PewDiePie shows in his video to argue he hasn't done anything wrong. If his argument is that he thinks that was sufficient for an advertorial, ok, but it doesn't seem like a problem with Polygon's reporting.

He didn't like the mention of CSGOLOTTO in it.

 

[Brad Grenz]

He didn't like the mention of CSGOLOTTO in it.

Good for him, but it's another recent example of the dangers of obfuscating a financial relationship. Frankly, it's a bit sad that the YouTubers who accepted money, directly profiting from this scheme, and in fact building their business models around it, aren't being punished at all. He's lucky the worst thing that happened is being tangentially compared to those CSLotto shitheels.

 

[PtM]

Good for him, but it's another recent example of the dangers of obfuscating a financial relationship. Frankly, it's a bit sad that the YouTubers who accepted money, directly profiting from this scheme, and in fact building their business models around it, aren't being punished at all. He's lucky the worst thing that happened is being tangentially compared to those CSLotto shitheels.

True. It was brought up in a dedicated thread that the guidelines from 2015 were merely clarifications on already effective law, so at most Youtubers could claim ignorance, not having done nothing wrong.

 

[chaobreaker]

Good for him, but it's another recent example of the dangers of obfuscating a financial relationship. Frankly, it's a bit sad that the YouTubers who accepted money, directly profiting from this scheme, and in fact building their business models around it, aren't being punished at all. He's lucky the worst thing that happened is being tangentially compared to those CSLotto shitheels.

These Youtubers have absolutely no expectations of accountability. Just look at TmarTn's channel. Despite being implicated in that scummy as fuck CSGO gambling plot and all those laughably pathetic attempts at damage control for the past two weeks, his channel has only seen a bit of damage since then. Most of his new videos still rake in viewers in the hundred thousands and are only barely leading in dislikes (but for how long?)

 

[Shrike_Priest]

Are there any places where you can reliably find either good editorials/op-eds or analytical feature pieces (like big post mortems/critiques)?

I keep finding occasional articles here and there, but I really miss having a solid "column" to turn to for good analysis of the video game industry. Even a solid blog would be fine.

While this might not be a perfect example, it's stuff like this I'm after:
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/the-failure-of-bioshock-infinite-writing-games-like-movies/1/

Where the writer discusses some aspect of video game design or critiques an aspect of it.

Like I said, I come across these articles from time to time, but would love to find either a good RSS, a solid recurring column or an aggregator of some kind.

Any tips?


Edit: Also, Pewdiepie knows full well that a disclaimer in the "more info"-section is not going to be viewed by many of his followers. And those who see it can't differentiate between "sponsored because he got the game for free/sponsored to give it positive coverage". It's bullshit and he knows it. He admits he could have disclosed it better and put it above the fold. But he didn't. He's right in that he's getting an inordinate amount of hate (and being wrongfully accused of not disclosing it) because of his high visibility. That is a problem. But the dude knew full well that what he was doing was not entirely unproblematic. And that Warner didn't require him to disclose it doesn't somehow free him of responsibility towards his viewers. It's shady, and his indignant response is not really doing him any favors in my book. That said, I feel sorry for the guy. I mean, I can't stand watching his videos, but he's the target of some really vicious hate mobs now and then, and that does suck. He's basically doing what I expect a guy in that position to do, shill and give exposure to games in return for cash. That's his business model. It's the business model of hundreds of make up/fashion/hair/hobby-youtubers out there. Nothing weird about that. But let's not pretend viewers of the video understood first time around that he was being paid for positive coverage based on that hidden disclaimer.