• 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.

The Games Journalism Thread: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

J

jschreier

Member
benny_a said:
Do you have examples when Kotaku did the same to you?

Under the gamespot tag kotaku doesn't really have much, so I did a google search and just an example when they linked the No Man's Sky video it was done this way:

9UFLXiy.png

(Two second gif)
http://kotaku.com/a-new-no-mans-sky-video-at-gamespot-has-a-few-new-detai-1601842805

This is not comprehensive and just the most recent thing I found on the first page of google but if this is a regular back and forth it should be noted in the thread so no false perception is perpetuated.
Click to expand...
This is actually a good example of the exact opposite scenario -- it's a blip telling readers to go check out a video at GameSpot, sending people their way.

Anyway, I won't keep harping on this but as I wrote in a lengthy post earlier in this thread, this particular article goes well beyond "reporting on reporting" territory.
 
B

benny_a

extra source of jiggaflops
jschreier said:
This is actually a good example of the exact opposite scenario -- it's a blip telling readers to go check out a video at GameSpot, sending people their way.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, I agree. I didn't make that clear enough in my post but I think this is proper form.

I am more looking for evidence of the opposite of what I found. (Again, not comprehensive.)
 
Corpsepyre

Corpsepyre

Banned
I'm on phone right now, so can't post the link, but the Spec Ops piece Polygon did was astounding. I read it recently too. Also, the History of Naughty Dog that Colin did for IGN deserves a mention here. Both great articles.
 
Corpsepyre

Corpsepyre

Banned
Yup. That's the one. Also, that second link is a great read as well. I'd love to see more similar articles out there.
 
J

jschreier

Member
JehutyRunner said:
I did a thread on it back when it was published, but I want to highlight the article in question again because damn it, it's the best article I've ever read. Not the best games article I've ever read, the best 'article' article I've ever read.

Eurogamer's Christian Donlan, who for the sake of personal disclosure is someone I consider a friend of mine in the games industry, wrote a piece last year on Spelunky, XCOM and how it helped him to prepare to deal with multiple scoliosis.

Read it here, it's highly recommended.

When Donlan's piece was published, although I can't ever begin to imagine what he is going through in regards to his MS, I could relate in at least a small part to the article in that games helped me through a massively scary time in my life. Something very recent too at the time of its publication in that a few weeks earlier, my mum died. And like I said, in some small part, his piece related to me.

Chris is one of the best writers we have in the industry right now, if not the best. Hopefully a lot more people will speak a lot more of him now we have this thread.
Click to expand...
Brutal piece. Thanks for sharing.
 
B

Bastables

Member
SheepyGuy said:
I don't think this is even an example of journalism. Podcasts like this are more like people having a conversation.

I also don't think their central thesis is wrong, even if they're expressing it really poorly. Most people can't tell the difference between 720 and 1080 at a reasonable sitting distance. Most people I think are probably not even aware of what these concepts are but that's another topic.
Click to expand...

The uptake of:
DVD over VHS
Blu ray over DVD
HD (1080 screens) over HD ready ("720" screens)
high ppi phones/laptops over low ppi screens phones/laptops

all give lie to the idea that the general public cannot discern a difference of a smoother image relative to fuzzier lower resolution image. They're being markedly disingenuous.
 
V

VibratingDonkey

Member
The Bad and/or The Ugly
Using Gamespot as an example here because it's the only site I've been kind of following on this. I'm sure it's not the only one.

I've been somewhat frustrated and disappointed with sites hyping up the upcoming release of GTA V on PC, informing us that we should probably pre-order (and later reminding us to pre-order), while failing to inform readers about the game's DRM. I'm not sure any of them even know that's a thing? Either way, many failed to include the bit of the system requirements that mentions the DRM, and as far as I'm aware, no one has bothered inquiring Rockstar about it.

Gamespot deserves some kudos though for being the only one to have asked Rockstar about mod support. But Rockstar's answer is vague, you can't conclusively tell what it means, beyond them really not wanting online to get compromised. It deserves to be followed up on. I don't know that it will be. I suspect once again these are things that will be left to be found out by us users. Which sucks. These are things I reckon we should've known about at this point, and game sites could've made it so.

Meanwhile, Check Out These Stunning New GTA 5 PC Images, see GTA 5 PC's Extensive Graphics Options Revealed, and know that GTA 5 PC Is the "Ultimate" Version.
I get splurging articles about a popular game, a bunch of them are informative even, but next to the nigh anti-effort of addressing the issues above, it's not a good look. It's the look of a marketing tool servicing a publisher, to the detriment of your readers, and to yourselves if the DRM turns out to be a heap of trash.

-----
Something else I remember noticing once upon a time.
ibap4HtNfEc4D2.PNG

These are news posts about game trailers, written by the same person, right after each other.
The headline for the Zynga game is editorialized to highlight that the game looks surprisingly good.
The other trailer is this.
Why is there not a ", Vomit" at the end of that headline? Instead it's extremely objectively matter of factly.
 
Lactose_Intolerant

Lactose_Intolerant

Member
dannyodwyer said:
Just to clarify, we linked to the original story in the first line of the story and this type of reporting-on-reporting is par-for-the-course in the media. When we break news, Kotaku pick it up too - and (sometimes) do us the same courtesy.
Click to expand...

Just because other people do it doesn't mean it isn't crappy.

Rewording other people's hard work is bad practice. After all those press releases you have to reword, it is probably a hard practice to break.

You can do more than this:
9UFLXiy.png
Click to expand...

but I would still only give a couple more lines of a description.
 
V

VariantX

Member
ArkhamFantasy said:
One big issue that really started rearing its ugly head in the last 5 years or so is broken games. However, video game reviews alot of times will not warn you of these issues before launch. (Because you dont know how multiplayer will perform before the servers get hit by the players).

We should see more reviewers do "review in progress" for multiplayer games. I'm not a huge IGN fan but i have to give them props for doing this.

Gametrailers didn't release their review for The Club until like 2 months after launch, i really respect that.
Click to expand...

I'm glad the underlined is starting to happen more. It's simply impossible to properly review some aspects of games before they launch because of how games are starting to become more reliant on internet connectivity for its features. A review done while next to no one is on the networks makes no sense for exactly the reason you stated. Then of course, giving the reviewer time to better process what they've played can't hurt either.
 
P

PepsimanVsJoe

Member
plebegamer said:
I'm not going to call on anyone specifically, but I'd like to air some grievances things I've seen and experienced in my brief time trying to get into game journalism.
Click to expand...

This sums up my experiences with games journalism as well.

I like games-writing too much to quit though, so I stick to reviewing on Steam.
 
R

RexNovis

Banned
The Good:

I know its been mentioned multiple times in this thread but Jason Schreier has been on a roll this year. Hes put out consistently well written and more importantly well reasearched original content at a regular clip and deserves to be commended for doing so. There is simply nowhere else we are getting content like this:


These are just a few of the articles that stuck out to me recently. There are plenty more and yet the scope, breadth and due diligence on display in just these few is leagues beyond the content I have seen anywhere else.


The Ugly:

John Walker's interview with Peter Molyneux made me feel physically ill. The fact that he opens the interview by asking Molyneux if he thought of himself as a pathological liar repulsed me to the point of feeling abject dread and utter dismay.

RPS: Do you think that you’re a pathological liar?


Peter Molyneux: That’s a very…

RPS: I know it’s a harsh question, but it seems an important question to ask because there do seem to be lots and lots of lies piling up.
Click to expand...

It only serves to become even more confrontational as the interview goes on. The appalling vigor with which he attacks Molyneux and dismantles his every statement is reminiscent of a rabid animal. He tears the poor man to shreds. While Molyneux has undoubtedly screwed up and done some questionable things hehas also created incredible games and inspired many to do the same. I've always seen him as sort of a cooky gaming uncle who means well but gets carried away as a result of his creative aspirations and dreams. Walker succeeded not only in shaming the man but berating him to the point of Molyneux having a breakdwon and decrying the industry he has loved. It was unecessarily cruel and absolutely disgusting. He should be ashamed of himself. The man is due some respect and Walker's unabashed refusal to surrender an ounce of respect or even dignity to the man absolutely crossed the line. As a result we are left with an article that reads more like a bullying session than an interview. The part I found the most horrifying was that a large segment of GAF was applauding Walker for his treatment of the interview. In my mind that is tantamount to cheering on a bully as he mercilessly beats on a helpless victim. To put it bluntly no other article has ever left me more disgusted at both the author and the community at large. To say I was shocked, appalled and disheartened by this interview and the reaction it received would be a vast understatement of the effect it had.
 
F

Fantastapotamus

Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
The amount of lies Molyneux has told over the last view years completely legitimizes this question to me. The bullshit he pulled with Godus was just the final straw.

He is not a "helpless victim" at this point, but a con-man that was treated with silk gloves by the press for years because of games he created ages ago. And finally he was confronted by somebody who had enough of his bullshit. The interview might have been too harsh, but at this point I can't help but applaud that somebody finally said what everybody was thinking for years. Everybody knew he was telling bullshit but continued to just treat it like an adorable quirk of his.

The man is due some respect
Click to expand...
No. No no no no no no no.
He deserves no respect whatsoever. He once did. Not anymore.
 
F

funkystudent

Member
Would love to hear the audio for that Molyneux interview. I bet it doesnt sound as harsh then it reads.

Anyway he interview reminds me of one of those interviews you see from like the BBC interviewing a political figure who has done some nasty stuff. Some times you just have to go all in on a hard subject. No point dancing around it at some point.

Peter had just defrauded his kickstarter backers and the story just broke about the Curiosity "winner" not actually getting anything. How are you going to start a interview after all that went down?

"Hello Peter. How are things? Well. Thats nice. So you are in the news a bunch recently. Tell us about that?"
 
D

duckroll

Member
I'm going to bring up a topic which I think not many people seem to want to talk about, especially on NeoGAF because of sensitivity reasons with regards to how we don't allow scans here.

How should people feel about scans, especially scans of magazines leaked before street date, in this day and age? This is something which I have discussed with other moderators in the past with regards to the increasing challenge of moderating scans on this forum, but I don't want this to be about rules on the forum, so the question here is more about how both readers and journalists in general feel about this.

I imagine that most people consume the news in the sense of "I want to know what's being talked about, I don't really care where it is from", and that's a fair perspective. It has always been the responsibility of editorial to be the check and balance of how the news gets out, and what sort of stand a publication takes on journalism ethics.

So it doesn't really surprise me that most readers don't care that major outlets like Polygon, Kotaku, and Anime News Network all seem to have no qualms about taking scans from Japanese magazines days before they actually hit most stores in Japan, posting them openly in their articles reporting on the scoops, and even placing their own watermarks on the scans. The readers just want the news, they want the pictures, they don't care where it comes from.

But how do the outlets justify this? Their bread and butter are people reading their sites and their news, and their reports. Sometimes they have exclusives from the industries they cover - be it previews, interviews, or whatever. Wouldn't it be a slap in the face if somehow the exclusive material they were provided with got leaked before they could deliver it to their readers on their own platform? That's what seems to have been happening for years now, and no one gives a fuck. Is there another side to the story?

For reference, I am talking about stuff like this:
http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/4/5174778/bravely-second-3ds-bravely-default-sequel
http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/new...station-4-playstation-3-game-announced/.82228
http://kotaku.com/first-look-at-star-ocean-5-1697679023
 
TheMissingLink

TheMissingLink

Member
I don't have time to read the whole thread, so km going to assume this is a catch-all kind of thread and wanted to get this off my chest...

I unsubbed from Poly's RSS because they had more stories about Game of Thrones and other not video games than actual video game stuff yesterday. So dumb. Just looking for the clicks.
 
M

Makonero

Member
duckroll said:
I'm going to bring up a topic which I think not many people seem to want to talk about, especially on NeoGAF because of sensitivity reasons with regards to how we don't allow scans here.

How should people feel about scans, especially scans of magazines leaked before street date, in this day and age? This is something which I have discussed with other moderators in the past with regards to the increasing challenge of moderating scans on this forum, but I don't want this to be about rules on the forum, so the question here is more about how both readers and journalists in general feel about this.
Click to expand...

I saw that Kotaku article this morning and felt it was a bit scummy of them to post the scans directly. I think you're right; similar to Jason's frustrations that other websites are taking his words and moving them around a bit on the page before posting it as their own article (which is wrong), taking another publication's scanned pages is also wrong. Can they not just post the news, source it, mention that it was leaked, all without actually publishing the scans themselves? Would that be as scummy? It's still news, so it needs to be posted, but I think the scans themselves are gratuitous.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
duckroll said:
But how do the outlets justify this? Their bread and butter are people reading their sites and their news, and their reports. Sometimes they have exclusives from the industries they cover - be it previews, interviews, or whatever. Wouldn't it be a slap in the face if somehow the exclusive material they were provided with got leaked before they could deliver it to their readers on their own platform? That's what seems to have been happening for years now, and no one gives a fuck. Is there another side to the story?
Click to expand...

Well, the other side of the story might be something like the fact that Game Informer routinely flips their lid when people share "digital scans". If you could find an example of them doing the JPN scan thing you'd really have an example of pants-around-their-ankles behaviour.
 
J

jschreier

Member
On one hand, the whole "exclusive reveal!" model is gross in the first place, as it turns what should be an independent journalistic outlet into a press release funnel. Also, given that our (predominantly US-based) readers wouldn't be able to buy the magazine in the first place, there's no way to, say, pull an excerpt and then direct people to the original source. So if we have the news -- in this case, photos of a big new game as revealed in a magazine we have access to -- it's tough to justify not sharing it. There's news value in those photos, and if we have them, we should be sharing them.

On the other hand, it's tacky, and even if Famitsu is essentially just a collection of press releases, scanning their pages still amounts to stealing their content, as Duckroll pointed out. I think there's a big difference between genuine scoops and publisher-provided "exclusive" reveals, but stealing is stealing.

So I can see both sides. Fortunately, this isn't something that comes up super often, because most video game publishers have realized that it's an antiquated business model. But it's definitely worth discussing.

And, yeah, there's really no justification for putting watermarks on magazine scans. That's tacky as hell. I said as much internally this morning.
 
C

CrimsonMajor

Neo Member
TheMissingLink said:
I don't have time to read the whole thread, so km going to assume this is a catch-all kind of thread and wanted to get this off my chest...

I unsubbed from Poly's RSS because they had more stories about Game of Thrones and other not video games than actual video game stuff yesterday. So dumb. Just looking for the clicks.
Click to expand...

Something has definitely shifted at Polygon, the long form pieces they used to do were great, but these days its 75% entertainment pieces, Kuchera click-bait editorials and lets play videos (I think they are on part 17 of a series on Bloodborne?!)
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
Say you're a video game journalist and you're making a news post on your site based on a forum post you read somewhere. What are the ethical implications here? I mean, first and foremost, I'd argue that in-lining the content is pretty wrong. You'd want to link to the content and just offer a summary so your readers would click through. Second, I'd argue that you want to attribute the post to the poster, and not just link the forum and give the forum name. I mention these things because journalists typically expect the same thing of us as (unpaid) moderators when people create GAF threads about their work, so I would assume turnabout is fair play? It's especially interesting given that when a journalist does it, they're often being paid (through salary, through page-view/click incentives, whatever) while forum posters doing it are doing it out of genuine enthusiasm and no alterior motives.

Having said those things, this ("A Disappointing Xenoblade Chronicles X Comparison", nominally a piece by Brian Ashcraft) got linked on GAF today, and I think it's basically a categorical example of how not to do stuff. The author takes multiple pieces of freely produced content. Both are in-lined. The entirety of the piece is presenting other peoples' content. One is attributed, one is not. Making matters worse, the author disparagingly quotes the person whose content he just took without attribution... and does so AGAIN without attributing the quote to him. "Someone on GameFAQs". He knows what he's doing, and he does it anyway.

I'm guessing the reason why he didn't attribute the image is because he didn't know if the forum poster was the original author, but that's on him to follow up on.

People working pseudonymously should be credited, and their work should be referenced in a fair use way: by excerpting or summarizing and linking to the full unabridged work without inlining.
 
R

RexNovis

Banned
duckroll said:
I'm going to bring up a topic which I think not many people seem to want to talk about, especially on NeoGAF because of sensitivity reasons with regards to how we don't allow scans here.

How should people feel about scans, especially scans of magazines leaked before street date, in this day and age? This is something which I have discussed with other moderators in the past with regards to the increasing challenge of moderating scans on this forum, but I don't want this to be about rules on the forum, so the question here is more about how both readers and journalists in general feel about this.

I imagine that most people consume the news in the sense of "I want to know what's being talked about, I don't really care where it is from", and that's a fair perspective. It has always been the responsibility of editorial to be the check and balance of how the news gets out, and what sort of stand a publication takes on journalism ethics.

So it doesn't really surprise me that most readers don't care that major outlets like Polygon, Kotaku, and Anime News Network all seem to have no qualms about taking scans from Japanese magazines days before they actually hit most stores in Japan, posting them openly in their articles reporting on the scoops, and even placing their own watermarks on the scans. The readers just want the news, they want the pictures, they don't care where it comes from.

But how do the outlets justify this? Their bread and butter are people reading their sites and their news, and their reports. Sometimes they have exclusives from the industries they cover - be it previews, interviews, or whatever. Wouldn't it be a slap in the face if somehow the exclusive material they were provided with got leaked before they could deliver it to their readers on their own platform? That's what seems to have been happening for years now, and no one gives a fuck. Is there another side to the story?

For reference, I am talking about stuff like this:
http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/4/5174778/bravely-second-3ds-bravely-default-sequel
http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/new...station-4-playstation-3-game-announced/.82228
http://kotaku.com/first-look-at-star-ocean-5-1697679023
Click to expand...

You know I was just thinking to myself how the article on kotaku was the first gaming related article I had read on the website in a long while that made me disgusted. Their posting of scans with that atrocious watermark was absolutely scummy. Publications should treat each other with respect and that means properly sourcing and not posting straight up shots of content from other publications. Its ethically equivalent to plagiarism in my opinion.

jschreier said:
On one hand, the whole "exclusive reveal!" model is gross in the first place, as it turns what should be an independent journalistic outlet into a press release funnel. Also, given that our (predominantly US-based) readers wouldn't be able to buy the magazine in the first place, there's no way to, say, pull an excerpt and then direct people to the original source. So if we have the news -- in this case, photos of a big new game as revealed in a magazine we have access to -- it's tough to justify not sharing it. There's news value in those photos, and if we have them, we should be sharing them.

On the other hand, it's tacky, and even if Famitsu is essentially just a collection of press releases, scanning their pages still amounts to stealing their content, as Duckroll pointed out. I think there's a big difference between genuine scoops and publisher-provided "exclusive" reveals, but stealing is stealing.

So I can see both sides. Fortunately, this isn't something that comes up super often, because most video game publishers have realized that it's an antiquated business model. But it's definitely worth discussing.

And, yeah, there's really no justification for putting watermarks on magazine scans. That's tacky as hell. I said as much internally this morning.
Click to expand...

There it is. You continue to prove that you deserve utmost respect in your field. 100% agreed and I'm really glad to hear that it is being discussed internally. I'm also curious what your thoughts on the citation of forum posts are. Do you agree with the practice of inlining content and posting it in the article with sourcing or do you think it is best to summarize and link to that content? I could see the argument both ways personally but Stump makes some solid points about the ethics of inlining the content.
 
D

duckroll

Member
jschreier said:
On one hand, the whole "exclusive reveal!" model is gross in the first place, as it turns what should be an independent journalistic outlet into a press release funnel. Also, given that our (predominantly US-based) readers wouldn't be able to buy the magazine in the first place, there's no way to, say, pull an excerpt and then direct people to the original source. So if we have the news -- in this case, photos of a big new game as revealed in a magazine we have access to -- it's tough to justify not sharing it. There's news value in those photos, and if we have them, we should be sharing them.
Click to expand...

I get where you're coming from here, and I appreciate there being a direct response to the issue without dodging it, but I'll point out that it's not really true that people being unable to buy Famitsu is a barrier here. Famitsu has an official website where they usually post content from the latest issue after it is released. Furthermore, sometimes news is embargoed for Japanese press until the weekly magazine cycle on Thursdays. When such articles are up online, they can be linked to and sourced, without having to include unauthorized photos and scans of a magazine obtained before street date.

It's a fair point that publisher PR controlling what is circulated by the press is sort of gross to begin with, but in the entertainment industry it is what it is. It's the playing ground everyone understands and there should be mutual respect. It just seems like poor form to be okay with doing something that is shady just because there is "value" in the news. That value can be delivered without crossing the line into something improper.

If there are leaked nude photos of a celebrity and it results in a lawsuit, I would expect a respectable news outlet to cover the story and inform people about the facts, but I would not expect to see the leaked photos published uncensored as part of the article just because it would be of interest to some people. In the same way I think people can be informed that Square Enix is making Star Ocean 5 with tri-Ace, and cover the general factual details, without having to publish scans from an unreleased magazine.

And, yeah, there's really no justification for putting watermarks on magazine scans. That's tacky as hell. I said as much internally this morning.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad someone spoke up about it at least, because that specifically made me roll my eyes. Really embarrassing.
 
P

PtM

Banned
duckroll said:
If there are leaked nude photos of a celebrity and it results in a lawsuit, I would expect a respectable news outlet to cover the story and inform people about the facts, but I would not expect to see the leaked photos published uncensored as part of the article just because it would be of interest to some people. In the same way I think people can be informed that Square Enix is making Star Ocean 5 with tri-Ace, and cover the general factual details, without having to publish scans from an unreleased magazine.
Click to expand...
Apples and oranges.
 
@

@MUWANdo

Banned
duckroll said:
In the same way I think people can be informed that Square Enix is making Star Ocean 5 with tri-Ace, and cover the general factual details, without having to publish scans from an unreleased magazine.
Click to expand...

"Covering the general factual details" usually means "paraphrasing the article to the point of facsimile", by which point you might as well just post scans. It's a charade.
 
D

duckroll

Member
@MUWANdo said:
"Covering the general factual details" usually means "paraphrasing the article to the point of facsimile", by which point you might as well just post scans. It's a charade.
Click to expand...

Not at all. We're talking about an in-depth preview with tons of screenshots, artwork, and a detailed interview with the producer, director, and head of tri-Ace. There's a ton of information there. Please don't pretend that the situation is all or nothing. It is perfectly possible to cover the news that Star Ocean 5 is happening, who is working on it, and some general information, without copying the preview wholesale word by word, or posting complete scans of media provided in the magazine. Don't be dense.
 
R

Richard the Lionheart

Neo Member
I read an article awhile ago about the demise of LucasArts (I think it was Kotaku). That piece really stood out to me because it trancended the low expectations of gaming journalists. The author clearly put the leg work needed (I.e. interviewing a ton of sources, have an overall thesis / direction, outside independent research) for an investigative article. It stood out because most articles and reviews are no more than extensions of industry pr. There isn't a lot of investigation, there is no assessment or reflection. As it stands now, there is no "New York Times" for the industry (I suppose Deadline would be a better example?). The mainstream outlets are no more than a strategic tool to hype up a game by marketing folks. Youtubers cannot be relied upon to do serious journalism if they want to obtain content, and often they are obsequious in their interviews or let a tremendous amount of bias taint any credibility they would have.
 
@

@MUWANdo

Banned
duckroll said:
Not at all. We're talking about an in-depth preview with tons of screenshots, artwork, and a detailed interview with the producer, director, and head of tri-Ace. There's a ton of information there. Please don't pretend that the situation is all or nothing. It is perfectly possible to cover the news that Star Ocean 5 is happening, who is working on it, and some general information, without copying the preview wholesale word by word, or posting complete scans of media provided in the magazine. Don't be dense.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it wasn't possible to do it tactfully, just that it happens less and less and that people only restrain themselves because their posts get modded if they don't, not because of any personal compunction. I see a ton of "summaries" posted and/or linked to here that are literally entire articles sectioned into bullet points to look like a synopsis, and one you hit that point, why even bother with the pretense?

Just to be clear, I'm not saying the rules should be loosened or that it's not being properly moderated or anything like that--if it's an ethical stance that the mods want to enforce then fair enough, I always just assumed the rules were established to protect the boards from takedown notices and whatnot.

On the broader question of whether it's ethical to reprint JP articles/features without seeking authorisation, or scrubbing identifiers from content sourced elsewhere; I think it's lazy and disrespectful and there are so many blogs out there nowadays that I think a lot of them only keep doing it because they're afraid they won't be able to "compete' if they stop. That being said, I also know what it's like to attempt to officially reprint articles from JP press outlets and it's a fucking chore, let me tell you. I'm sure there are outlets that are willing and capable of doing things by the book but can't because they're being stonewalled for no reason, so I can understand people deciding "well, we tried doing things the right way and they're clearly not paying attention, let's just do whatever".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Skull & Bones: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly - And The Utterly Incomprehensible - DF Tech Review
2
62
3K
ManaByte replied
What kind of gaming articles do you guys want to see?
17
716
Wildebeest replied
Last Gens we were shouting "media bias" at gaming journalism while gaming youtubers were unbiased. Now the roles has reversed.
Opinion Cringe 2
53
3K
Shut0wen replied
Have you ever played what you genuinely considered to be a “good” game on Mobile?
2 3 4
173
5K
MagnetoWasRight replied
GPT-4: A Revolution in the Gaming Industry? Exploring Opportunities and Ethical Concerns
2
91
7K
reksveks replied
Top Bottom