Support NeoGAF

[jschreier]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1054439

The thread dis-confirming the rumor.

Games journalism isn't dead because of corruption. It's dead because the people in the business are DUMB.

Incidentally, I've been talking to two different people who are looking to hire new games reporters -- hard news people -- but just can't find anyone with enough experience/talent. I wouldn't say "games journalism is dead" -- that's pretty dumb -- but there are systemic issues that make it tough for the field to attract and keep talent. One of those systemic issues is that news reporters generally develop a lot of bad habits because they're let loose and they don't have the luxury to work with a top-tier editor like Stephen Totilo or Chris Kohler. (I've had a successful career because I've been lucky enough to work with both.)

Some sites think of "news" as the bottom of the ladder -- the place where freelancers and low-level editors can just aggregate 10 posts a day with no regard for what's real or what's true. It's a bummer.

 

[Neuromancer]

(Cross posting from the Phil Spencer thread)

The follow up IGN article contains not a single hint of responsibility, let alone apology. In fact it doesn't even reference the previous article except as a link.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/05...crosoft-purchase-of-silent-hills-for-xbox-one

I'm not sure whether I should be surprised or not.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Well done IGN, you created two articles and probably a bunch of clicks out of nothing. Literally nothing. Congratz.

 

[Aroll]

Actually, I think that headline is fine. The story isn't that they make their games seem cheaper by not including taxes; it's that they list those games next to third-party games that do include taxes, therefore making first-party titles seem cheaper. That's a bit hard to sum up in an article's title, so I don't really see a problem with angling it as a "How [Thing Happens]." By nature any article title that includes an interrogative word -- even if it doesn't ask a question -- is going to require readers to open the article for a proper explanation, so to some extent that is indeed "clickbait," but this strikes me as harmless because you don't feel cheated once you've read it. You don't feel like you had to click just to get information that could've been summed up in the headline.

That's the key, right? A headline has to resonate and draw people without making them feel misled or aggravated once they actually see the article. It's a task easier said than done, and there's a wide margin between boring and baity, but what's most important from a media outlet's perspective is to make readers feel like a given article was worth their time. I used the release date example because "[Game] Release Date Revealed" is one of the most frustrating headlines I can imagine -- it actively aggravates readers and wastes their time for the sake of a click. If something can be summed up nicely in the headline without sacrificing punchiness or quality, then it should be.

Thank you for this explanation. I've been trying to converse with the fans of our site the last year or so about "clickbait complaints" because I feel like the negative connotation of that term is being grossly misused. Titles have a limited character count - more limited than Twitter, and even more limited if we want to consider link sharing on places like Facebook where they will cut off the title if it's too long. Some stories are pretty much impossible to summarize effectively into a title, but the idea is that you still want to drive interest into folks reading the piece, the big part is making sure that piece is fulfilling. I think the worst part of readers at times are those that peruse headlines and then assume to know all the news when they have failed to gain any context because they didn't dig deeper into the story. They saw the headline and made assumptions without context.

Some headlines write themselves - new trailer for x game, etc. Release date is on this month and this day, etc. But there are few sites that get those headlines wrong, outside of those that make people go inside to see a date, which I think most agree is silly.

Finding a balance of giving you enough information in a limited one liner and trying to provide depth in the content for context is something many struggle with, but I hate how much clickbait is thrown around at literally anything that entices you to click the headline. We want our readers to be informed, and headline scanning is now how one really gets informed very well.

 

[ShinMaruku]

Embarrassing moment from IGN, and even more embarrassing is this journalist tweeting that he's not embarrassed when he clearly should suck it up and admit it was a mistake. smh

Most people would never admit they are wrong. It takes a great human being to own up yo their mistakes.

 

[Massa]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

 

[Hassun]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

Definitely. I don't even know how that Polygon article made it onto the site. I mean sure Polygon does not have the best reputation as it is but they do have some terrific long-form articles every so often.
This preview though...

 

[Jeff-DSA]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

That was exactly how I felt. A perfect response, really.

 

[Delusibeta]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

Ah, Polygon. Only they would publish a preview of a videogame with can be boiled down to "i dun curr". But then again, I'm not sure why anyone expects anything from them. It's the standard Vox Media article.

 

[RockTurtle]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

i couldn't believe it till i read it:

http://www.polygon.com/2015/6/1/8687867/rock-band-4-preview

choice quotes:

All video games are stupid, of course. That whole thing of, 'you're not really shooting terrorists or winning the World Cup, you're just pressing buttons' is patronizing and simplistic but every now and again you come across a game that has so little emotional connection to who you are that you end up standing there, gazing at the screen and saying "I'm just pressing buttons and my life has no meaning," to a slightly bemused PR person.

 

[Zaph]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

Yup, that's pretty much a perfect example of the type of self-serving 'journalism' which has left so many people wondering who exactly the enthusiast press is for and questioning the motives of virtually every journo (even the good ones who work very hard and write great stuff).

Also, it's Colin Campbell. Dude is part of the trashy old guard and loves his perks. He's one of the few who've actually been named by other journo's as taking money for coverage during the early magazine days.

 

[Moon_frogger]

Hmmm not feeling the outrage . We all know writers are sent to cover games they don't give a shit about. This guy actually took an opportunity to say something interesting about rock band and guitar hero. It's clear he payed attention to the game enough to give some details About new features, and managed to comment on both what makes these games fun and why they declined.

Are you guys really mad that this wasn't another pr regurgitated bore fest of a preview?

 

[Flavius]

I don't take issue with the approach, but if the few facts about the game presented in the preview are inaccurate (as suggested in the comments), then that's pretty fucking sad.

Otherwise, (and no disrespect intended) my take is it's just another example of younger writers making themselves part of the story. I don't take issue with that at all, so long as their writing isn't shite.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

Fight and Heal: Now On Tour!

 

[daegan]

Something I found interesting buried deep in the recent Witcher firestorm thread was this blurb from Erik Kain:

Speaking of which. NeoGaf readers in particular need to understand something: I am not merely a blogger using Forbes.com for my personal ramblings as though this was WordPress.com. I am a freelancer, yes, also known here as a “contributor.” I am paid for my work, just like (hopefully) freelancers at many other publications. I have written here for many years, and it is irresponsible for people to continually spread falsehoods about what that means. I doubt very much that NeoGaf always points out whenever a writer at IGN, Eurogamer, or elsewhere is a freelancer. I’m not sure why it’s so terribly important to do so with my work.

Now, as I understand it, being a Forbes contributor is not something you are "hired" for - you apply, and are given an account, etc. (In fact, here's the form to apply.)

It doesn't necessarily mean you "work" for Forbes any more than Jim Sterling "works" for YouTube, and that's the nature of why I think this gets pointed out on Kain threads especially.

Where this becomes possibly problematic for me is when he draws a line between himself and freelancers. To the best of my knowledge, he doesn't pitch articles and they aren't approved by anyone; he is free to run his page as he wishes as long as he doesn't violate Forbes' guidelines. Is that equivalent to being a freelancer? I personally don't think so, but I'm curious what others think.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Wow, that Polygon "preview" is really something else...

"I don't give a shit about the game, could be fun if that's your kind of thing tho, I dunno *shrug*"

 

[creatchee]

Hmmm not feeling the outrage . We all know writers are sent to cover games they don't give a shit about. This guy actually took an opportunity to say something interesting about rock band and guitar hero. It's clear he payed attention to the game enough to give some details About new features, and managed to comment on both what makes these games fun and why they declined.

Are you guys really mad that this wasn't another pr regurgitated bore fest of a preview?

I said the same thing in the OT and got... well... the response you probably expect. My contention is twofold:

1. I don't see any ethical problems here. He prefaced his preview with his feelings towards the genre. He made his state of mind clear, yet still managed to report the story. I have more of a problem with huge fans reporting on games because they are more apt to see things with rose colored glasses if they cannot separate their fandom and critique.

2. People are more mad because this is Polygon and it's in re: Rock Band.

 

[Htown]

Hmmm not feeling the outrage . We all know writers are sent to cover games they don't give a shit about. This guy actually took an opportunity to say something interesting about rock band and guitar hero. It's clear he payed attention to the game enough to give some details About new features, and managed to comment on both what makes these games fun and why they declined.

Are you guys really mad that this wasn't another pr regurgitated bore fest of a preview?

Name one thing about the article you couldn't have gotten from a press release, where you would have managed to get the same amount of information without having to read about the tribulations some asshole went through by being forced to go to a party on a rooftop with a video game playing in the background that he wasn't paying attention to. That preview was the worst kind of lazy, narcissistic drivel I've ever seen on a game site.

What on Earth did he say that was interesting about Rock Band and Guitar Hero? "I didn't like them, so it's no surprise they died out?"

 

[Morrigan Stark]

That preview was the worst kind of lazy, narcissistic drivel I've ever seen on a game site.

Yeah, that was really the worst aspect of it. What a worthless, douchey piece.

 

[old manatee]

That preview reminds me of recent Idle Thumbs episodes, where Danielle will play a game, but instead of getting right to her opinion there will be a filibuster where Chris, Jake or Sean will talk at length about how they aren't interested in playing the game, but they have already formed a bunch of opinions about it from some scrap of media they saw.

 

[Neuromancer]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

I wonder what would happen if I went to work tomorrow, and instead of writing a report about the evidence I found on a suspects computer, I decided instead to write a report about how bored I was doing the examination and how I don't really give a shit about my job or anything else. I bet that would go over really well.

 

[creatchee]

Name one thing about the article you couldn't have gotten from a press release, where you would have managed to get the same amount of information without having to read about the tribulations some asshole went through by being forced to go to a party on a rooftop with a video game playing in the background that he wasn't paying attention to. That preview was the worst kind of lazy, narcissistic drivel I've ever seen on a game site.

What on Earth did he say that was interesting about Rock Band and Guitar Hero? "I didn't like them, so it's no surprise they died out?"

He confirmed the use of wireless legacy instruments, which was later reconfirmed in the OT by a Harmonix representative.

 

[Puaru1]

I really dislike when writers use played out internet memes, especially in article titles. It always seems like they are "Pastor Dave" who "knows how to talk to the kids in their language." Even if the content of the article is good stuff, I've already been colored by your sick meme that was outdated 2 weeks ago.

 

[FStop7]

That preview reminds me of recent Idle Thumbs episodes, where Danielle will play a game, but instead of getting right to her opinion there will be a filibuster where Chris, Jake or Sean will talk at length about how they aren't interested in playing the game, but they have already formed a bunch of opinions about it from some scrap of media they saw.

Exactly why I quit that podcast.

 

[BY2K]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

I'd say this deserve its own thread.

It certainly does more than the Polygon article did.

 

[Mael]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

Wait, it's a site who's dedicated to being only positive about the industry?
Did I just reach a PR wet dream or something?

 

[Toxi]

Wait, it's a site who's dedicated to being only positive about the industry?
Did I just reach a PR wet dream or something?

No it's not. Where'd you get that idea?

Chris explains pretty throughly why he made the blog here.

And if you want a negative article about the industry, he has some of those too (Specifically, about 2K shutting down the NBA 2014 servers).

EDIT: Looks like I missed his article Plans for the Site, where he indeed talks about wanting to focus on being positive. However, that hardly means he's going to just be a PR mouthpiece.

 

[Mael]

No it's not. Where'd you get that idea?

Chris explains pretty throughly why he made the blog here.

And if you want a negative article about the industry, he has some of those too (Specifically, about 2K shutting down the NBA 2014 servers).

EDIT: Looks like I missed his article Plans for the Site, where he indeed talks about wanting to focus on being positive. However, that hardly means he's going to just be a PR mouthpiece.

Ok, I think I may have jumped the fun gun a little.
This ticked me off at the end of the article.

Here on Tired Old Hack, I am committed to positive coverage of video games. Too many sites are putting a negative, cynical spin on this incredible industry (the above being one of the most blatant examples) and I refuse to go down that route.

This site is a celebration of gaming. My aim is to have you leaving my site with a smile on your face and an urge to play more games, not a frown and a feeling that your favourite hobby is going down the toilet. Because it really isn’t.

We live in a time where there are more fantastic games than ever before, many of which can be bought for only a handful of quid, or sometimes not even that.

We have games where we can turn into squids and cover arenas in paint, or jump into massive robots and destroy cities, or explore a beautifully accurate representation of the Nostromo from Alien, or race go-karts up a waterfall.

And yet many of us spend our times moaning and whining about DLC and resolutions and free-to-play gaming.

Well, not on here.

On here we celebrate.

If there's one I thing I don't want to hear from a journalist is only good thing,
I don't care about only showing the negative side, after all the fun of the games is really the best part of the whole industry.
Heck that's the whole point of the entertainment industry after all, be entertaining.

 

[Adam Blue]

Where this becomes possibly problematic for me is when he draws a line between himself and freelancers. To the best of my knowledge, he doesn't pitch articles and they aren't approved by anyone; he is free to run his page as he wishes as long as he doesn't violate Forbes' guidelines. Is that equivalent to being a freelancer? I personally don't think so, but I'm curious what others think.

I find it disgusting any time I see a post here where someone wants to shoot down his credibility just because he's a Forbes contributor. There was a time where they had way more contributors and less restrictions, but they have less and writers and more restrictions. It is quite possible he can write what he wants as he's earned it as a contributor, but these writers have to go through an approval process.

Modern games journalism isn't what it used to be (obviously) and bloggers/youtubers are taking the spotlight. Forbes is blurring that line by allowing enthusiasts to earn a place without them being a full-time employee.

 

[creatchee]

I find it disgusting any time I see a post here where someone wants to shoot down his credibility just because he's a Forbes contributor. There was a time where they had way more contributors and less restrictions, but they have less and writers and more restrictions. It is quite possible he can write what he wants as he's earned it as a contributor, but these writers have to go through an approval process.

Modern games journalism isn't what it used to be (obviously) and bloggers/youtubers are taking the spotlight. Forbes is blurring that line by allowing enthusiasts to earn a place without them being a full-time employee.

http://www.poynter.org/news/mediawire/173743/what-the-forbes-model-of-contributed-content-means-for-journalism/

With no editorial process, you cannot hold Forbes Contributors to the same standard or in the same light as journalists who have one.

 

[scully1888]

Ok, I think I may have jumped the fun gun a little.
This ticked me off at the end of the article.

If there's one I thing I don't want to hear from a journalist is only good thing,
I don't care about only showing the negative side, after all the fun of the games is really the best part of the whole industry.
Heck that's the whole point of the entertainment industry after all, be entertaining.

Hi Mael

I wrote the article and am the man behind Tired Old Hack. Just to clarify, all I meant about focusing on the positive side of things is that I won't be doing articles moaning about resolution or DLC or the financial situation of companies.

So many 'proper' sites post countless negative stories because bad news sells, but I won't be doing that.

That said, of course, if I preview or review a game and I end up not liking it, I'll have no problems saying so. It's definitely not a "PR's wet dream", as you put it.

I've been in this industry for nine years and have no problem writing honestly about games, and that's something I intend to continue doing on Tired Old Hack.

I suppose the best way to describe it is that I want the site to feel more like a '90s mag like EGM or GamePro (or, if you're a UK gamer like me, Mean Machines or N64 Magazine): enthusiastic coverage but still with honest reviews.

Hope that clarifies things!

Chris

 

[daegan]

I find it disgusting any time I see a post here where someone wants to shoot down his credibility just because he's a Forbes contributor. There was a time where they had way more contributors and less restrictions, but they have less and writers and more restrictions. It is quite possible he can write what he wants as he's earned it as a contributor, but these writers have to go through an approval process.

Modern games journalism isn't what it used to be (obviously) and bloggers/youtubers are taking the spotlight. Forbes is blurring that line by allowing enthusiasts to earn a place without them being a full-time employee.

Technically, GAF members go through an approval process as well. I get that Forbes is "blurring the line", and I'll agree that it's not right to dismiss his work offhand because of his status as a contributor (and I'll be the first to admit that I've done that.)

But I still find his comparison of his contributor status and a freelancer problematic. Freelancers don't get this type of thing because the outlet vets their pieces (unless it's an op-ed, of course):

The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Really, going forward, I would hope that it's sufficient to just tag posts about his and other contributors' work with the name the write under. It's apparent that Forbes doesn't particularly stand behind them or their work and so, IMO, they shouldn't be afforded the extra credibility the Forbes brand gives them. (Though that credibility has certainly been tarnished by the output of the contributor program as well.)

 

[Toxi]

Thanks for responding Chris!

As someone who never read the old gaming magazines growing up, I don't have a good idea of how they're written, but I respect your decision to stay positive. Cynical writing is important, but that doesn't mean optimistic perspectives don't also have their place as long as they're sincere.

 

[Neuromancer]

Chris by the way I really liked your response article. Hopefully the people who make the decisions about what stories to run or not read it and take it to heart.

 

[Mael]

Hi Mael

I wrote the article and am the man behind Tired Old Hack. Just to clarify, all I meant about focusing on the positive side of things is that I won't be doing articles moaning about resolution or DLC or the financial situation of companies.

Hi Chris, very nicely surprised you took the time to reply.
I get that now, I was half expecting something closer to the people wanting "objective" review or some crap like that.
Your about page actually surprised me in a good way.

So many 'proper' sites post countless negative stories because bad news sells, but I won't be doing that.

I get what you're saying and somewhat agree (because seriously Nintendo being doomed since the late 80's is not interesting if you ask me).
Then again if you encounter something in the news that rubs you the wrong way, I'd hope that you would report on it.
I think that article Toxi posted about NBA 2014's server closing answer that fear.

That said, of course, if I preview or review a game and I end up not liking it, I'll have no problems saying so. It's definitely not a "PR's wet dream", as you put it.

Looking at your credentials, if you were in the game journalism in the 90's I know that you're not IGN.

I've been in this industry for nine years and have no problem writing honestly about games, and that's something I intend to continue doing on Tired Old Hack.

I suppose the best way to describe it is that I want the site to feel more like a '90s mag like EGM or GamePro (or, if you're a UK gamer like me, Mean Machines or N64 Magazine): enthusiastic coverage but still with honest reviews.

Hope that clarifies things!

Chris

I'm from France so I didn't read that at the time but I know these names.
I usually dislike positive coverage because of the hype machine but I'll keep an eye on what you're doing.

false edit: your list of 30 GC games I'll never forgive the non mention of FFCC, tired old hack indeed >;p

Spoiler

Your lists are surprisingly interesting

actual edit : There's actually an article explaining how and why for the lists?

 

[scully1888]

There's actually an article explaining how and why for the lists?

Ha! Yup, I'm big on transparency. If anyone wants to know why I do what I do at any point I'm always happy to explain it.

 

[Dingobloo]

Can you imagine an estate agent putting up an ad for someone’s flat and writing “personally I don’t care for this apartment at all”?

From An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit


This is where the article loses me. The two are definitely not equivalent and intentionally or not it speaks volumes. I think that polygon preview deserves the flak it's getting but this article is not a particularly good response to it.

 

[RockTurtle]

Ha! Yup, I'm big on transparency. If anyone wants to know why I do what I do at any point I'm always happy to explain it.

3) Multi-page lists can die in a fire

Due to their often lengthy nature, list features can sometimes take up numerous pages in a magazine. I’ve written some epic lists for Official Nintendo Magazine that sometimes took up eight or ten pages.

One of the wonderful things about the internet and web browsers, however, is scrolling. Have a look at your mouse. There’s a reasonable chance it’s got a little wheel on it. Failing that, slide your finger down the right hand side of your laptop’s touchpad. Or just use your finger and swipe up on your tablet’s screen.

a man after my own heart!

 

[Petrae]

An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit

Great article.

It sure was. That Polygon "preview" was utter shit, and deservedly got called out here. Readers don't give two fucks about whether you like what you've been sent to cover; be a professional and do your job, or refuse the assignment because you honestly can't be bothered with what you're covering.

There's no way I could take anything Campbell would say about Rock Band 4 seriously after his pointless intro. He's not doing his readers nor his employer any kind of service by presenting a piece such as this.

As the Tired Old Hack piece illustrates, Campbell didn't have to heap praise onto RB4... but he at least could have shown some interest in wanting to try it instead of being the whiny old-guard curmudgeon who was there because he had to be. The way I read it, it sounded more like a punishment than an assignment.

I won't say that Polygon is trash or anything, but I lost a significant amount of respect for Campbell for phoning this crap in and for Polygon for choosing to publish it as is.

It's not nu-games journalism. It's not edgy. It's not a worthwhile experiment in preview-writing. It's lazy and it's bullshit.

 

[scully1888]

From An open letter to journalists who don’t give a shit


This is where the article loses me. The two are definitely not equivalent and intentionally or not it speaks volumes.

My point was more that you wouldn't expect them to suddenly decide they didn't want to their job properly.

An estate agent's job is to sell houses. A games journalist's job, when previewing a game, is to actually cover the game (be that positively or negatively). You wouldn't expect either to renege on that deal.

 

[duckroll]

I kinda have to agree that tone is really important to me when reading something. I certainly don't like reading a preview which sounds like an ad or a viral marketing attempt, but at the same time I think the "boo hoo this job sucks look at how SICK the publishers events are getting I hate my job!!!!!" thing is a huge turn off. When I read a game preview, I want to be informed by someone who gives a shit. I want to hear about what's in the game, how it plays, how it compares to the last entry if it's a sequel, and I want to be able to relate to the writer. Reading a preview or review of a game written by someone who clearly has little or no interest in the actual subject matter is a waste of anyone's time.

 

[PolarGamer]

Hmmm not feeling the outrage . We all know writers are sent to cover games they don't give a shit about. This guy actually took an opportunity to say something interesting about rock band and guitar hero. It's clear he payed attention to the game enough to give some details About new features, and managed to comment on both what makes these games fun and why they declined.

Are you guys really mad that this wasn't another pr regurgitated bore fest of a preview?

This. And the article bashing this Polygon piece is forgetting Hunter S. Thompson. The guy who revolutionized journalism by writing almost exclusively about himself. In that regard, the writer of the Polygon article tried to do something interesting. And if he failed, he did so by not writing more about the weird venue and himself.

 

[EmptySpace]

polygon had really good features.

too bad no one read those and so they're back with their crazy articles.


it is a two-way street. people complain about polygon yet they don't read the articles that mattered and now we're left with these types of articles.

 

[Puaru1]

This. And the article bashing this Polygon piece is forgetting Hunter S. Thompson. The guy who revolutionized journalism by writing almost exclusively about himself. In that regard, the writer of the Polygon article tried to do something interesting. And if he failed, he did so by not writing more about the weird venue and himself.

Writing about himself and the venue is for his personal blog. Polygon's official preview should be focused on the game, not the event.

 

[bearythebear]

I kinda have to agree that tone is really important to me when reading something. I certainly don't like reading a preview which sounds like an ad or a viral marketing attempt, but at the same time I think the "boo hoo this job sucks look at how SICK the publishers events are getting I hate my job!!!!!" thing is a huge turn off. When I read a game preview, I want to be informed by someone who gives a shit. I want to hear about what's in the game, how it plays, how it compares to the last entry if it's a sequel, and I want to be able to relate to the writer. Reading a preview or review of a game written by someone who clearly has little or no interest in the actual subject matter is a waste of anyone's time.

It's part of the trend where writer's try to put themselves in the story for no fucking reason. Unless it's the right context this just comes off as unfocused and pointless.

 

[Petrae]

This. And the article bashing this Polygon piece is forgetting Hunter S. Thompson. The guy who revolutionized journalism by writing almost exclusively about himself. In that regard, the writer of the Polygon article tried to do something interesting. And if he failed, he did so by not writing more about the weird venue and himself.

If this is what Campbell is shooting for, count me out. I'm looking for information and impressions. I don't care about Campbell's likes and dislikes. I don't care about the venue, or the drinks. He-- and Polygon, by extension-- wasted my time and looked sorely unprofessional while doing so.

Let him take to another avenue to share his personal preferences and how he didn't care for this assignment. Don't goad me into reading it by passing it off as a Rock Band preview.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

i couldn't believe it till i read it:

http://www.polygon.com/2015/6/1/8687867/rock-band-4-preview

choice quotes:

Exactly what I was going to quote before I saw somebody else already had. That's a fantastic attitude to have when going into a game preview.

Hope people realize there's a difference between a negative preview and a preview where the writer clearly doesn't give a shit about what they're doing.

EDIT: That being said, some of the comparisons that article draws are a bit off:

Can you imagine an estate agent putting up an ad for someone’s flat and writing “personally I don’t care for this apartment at all”?

But when I go to McDonalds because I feel like eating something unhealthy I don’t expect the guy behind the counter to tell me “Big Macs are shit” and lock up his till.

Both of these are examples of someone trying to sell me something, which isn't really what a journalist preview is meant to be. It's not meant to be about how you were bored at the event and barely even played the game you were sent to report on either mind you.

 

[FStop7]

This. And the article bashing this Polygon piece is forgetting Hunter S. Thompson. The guy who revolutionized journalism by writing almost exclusively about himself. In that regard, the writer of the Polygon article tried to do something interesting. And if he failed, he did so by not writing more about the weird venue and himself.

Colin Campbell is no Hunter S. Thompson. Please.

 

[PolarGamer]

Colin Campbell is no Hunter S. Thompson. Please.

Never said he was or is. But that is where this style of writing comes from.

 

[Tripon]

Colin Campbell is barely Hunter S. Thompson's hat.