Support NeoGAF

[PolarGamer]

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

What Polygon should be doing is probably up to them. Writing yet another preview piece from an event that mass produces identical articles was probably boring to the journalist (and me). So he tried something different. Perhaps it did not quite work, but I appreciate the effort.

 

[Brad Grenz]

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.

Gonzo journalism involved writing about one's self inasmuch as the author was a participant in the story. Campbell wrote about himself refusing to engage with the subject. It was fucking pointless. Next time he can stay home and write about what it was like to live-snark the event on Twitter.

 

[Jumplion]

You know, it would have been an interesting article if it was about how marketed and commercialized game marketers are to the point where they try to butter up journalists and press, lavishly peppering journos with goodies and nice rooms, all that jazz. Maybe talk about the relationship between PR and journalists, how from his perspective it may just all be getting boring and too much, unauthentic, full of saccharine hype.

Buuuuuuuuut we get a dude complaining about creme puffs and the nihilism of consumerism maaaaaan. Like, seriously, come on. You can do better here guys...

 

[Glass Shark]

If you want to read a boring by-the-numbers bullet list of all the features of Rock Band 4, I'm sure Harmonix has a press release you can read.

I'm tired of the traditional model of games media, and it's getting worse than ever before. All these IGN partnerships with publishers for exclusive reveals feel so icky. I'd rather trust a YouTuber at this point.

 

[Neuromancer]

What Polygon should be doing is probably up to them. Writing yet another preview piece from an event that mass produces identical articles was probably boring to the journalist (and me). So he tried something different. Perhaps it did not quite work, but I appreciate the effort.

Trying something new isn't commendable in itself. He could have made a 10 minute video of him giving the finger to people who are interested in this game and learning more about it, and it would have been equally worthless.

 

[Petrae]

If you want to read a boring by-the-numbers bullet list of all the features of Rock Band 4, I'm sure Harmonix has a press release you can read.

I'm tired of the traditional model of games media, and it's getting worse than ever before. All these IGN partnerships with publishers for exclusive reveals feel so icky. I'd rather trust a YouTuber at this point.

Reading genuine impressions-- rather than this gun-to-my-head forced trash so the writer gets paid trash-- is what separates a preview piece from a regurgitation of a fact sheet. Campbell was there, and could have better-elaborated on his experience with the game. He chose to write a piece about himself, with a few token observations... and it ended up being a far worse piece of content from professional games press than anything I've read in a long time.

I don't expect rainbows and candy from every preview. I do expect the writer to, you know, give a shit-- or at least sell me on the illusion of giving a shit. It's possible to make a preview interesting and get away from copying bullet points while not making it about yourself and how you hate your assignment.

 

[TheJesusFish]

Trying something new isn't commendable in itself. He could have made a 10 minute video of him giving the finger to people who are interested in this game and learning more about it, and it would have been equally worthless.

The problem is that a lot of people only look at one or two video game websites. If Polygon is the ONLY website someone looks at, that's the preview of Rockband 4 that they will read.

You have to write as if you were in a vacuum - especially when you are a large outlet like Polygon, imo.

 

[Buttonbasher]

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.

Agreed. So much of it seems like a little sister trying to show an older sibling something cool, and then the older sibling convincing them why it's not. It's a huge bummer everytime it happens, which is seemingly every episode she's on. It's a shame because the podcast didn't used to be like that.

Admittedly, as they've all transitioned to the indie development scene, they've become more interested in those games. Tastes change, and that's fine, but it seems to be at the expense of bigger games. Danielle plays both, and seems to enjoy both; but the rest of the gang (except Spaff) always giddily dogpile on how dumb the bigger games sound.

It's really off putting.

 

[daegan]

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.

I think it's more down to those massive features don't write and design themselves and take a lot of time.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

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

Great article.

Good read.

 

[SolidSnakex]

What Polygon should be doing is probably up to them. Writing yet another preview piece from an event that mass produces identical articles was probably boring to the journalist (and me). So he tried something different. Perhaps it did not quite work, but I appreciate the effort.

Why are you thinking that what you're describing is the only other option for a preview? They could absolutely send someone that hasn't been a fan of music games or someone that liked them at one point and no longer does to see if there's anything about Rock Band 4 that changes their mind. That preview would end up giving both those that like RB and those that haven't liked it a good idea of whether they'd like RB4. It wouldn't be like every other preview that was likely coming from a fan of the franchise. Instead you don't really get any of that. A site isn't doing anyone any favors by sending someone that's annoyed that they even have to cover a certain game.

 

[Messofanego]

If you want to read a boring by-the-numbers bullet list of all the features of Rock Band 4, I'm sure Harmonix has a press release you can read.

I'm tired of the traditional model of games media, and it's getting worse than ever before. All these IGN partnerships with publishers for exclusive reveals feel so icky. I'd rather trust a YouTuber at this point.

Nope, Youtubers are still the least trustworthy. At least most known videogame outlets have a code of ethics and editorial/advertising divide unlike Youtubers who do advertorials time to time (and sometimes isn't even disclosed).

 

[Zornack]

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.

Eh, I'd hazard a guess that it's the same people who read those articles that are also against what Polygon has become. It's just that those people make up a minuscule percentage of possible traffic so they're not worth catering to.

 

[Aroll]

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.

Exactly. The problem with Polygon's piece isn't that he prefaced it by the fact he doesn't enjoy the genre. That's totally fine. Sometimes you cover genres and games you don't like, so when you're going to give an opinion piece on it it is always important to preface that piece with some honesty about the series/genre (whether you like it or not, have you played many of them, etc). I feel like there is a valid opinions that came come from all angles (veteran players, ones who have played it once or twice, those who don't like the genre, etc).

What I really take issue with is that the preview they wrote was 75% about how much he dislikes the games (and even going so far as to call videogames trash) and doesn't want to be there instead of giving a real preview of the game. The only points I got out of it were the following:

- Game has leveling up/ranking
- Game rewards you for singing to the way it wants you to sing (like all prior games)
- He treated the singing part like it was new (ones google search could of solved that problem)
- He didn't even talk about playing any of the instruments outside of confirming legacy instruments

That's 3 press release points. There was no opinion there. No passionate insight into it. It doesn't even sound like he PLAYED the game, outside of the singing portion. Like, he didn't even give the game a thoughrough run through.

That's what bugs me - love or hate the game, you need to play it. We have a team going to E3. The game we cover might have a demo. If it does, we are going to be playing that demo a dozen+ times, exploring every aspect of it, and forming our thoughts off it. Becuase it;s a preview and despite E3 being a huge event, there are millions who can't be there that want to know, and yes, if we don't like it, we can break down every single reason why we don't in a passionate explanation, rather than being all "so we waited in line for the 10th time, why are we here again? Right E3. There is a game here and by now I know it sucks, but I have to play it again because of some artificial obligation. Really, the most enjoyable time I am having is chatting with folks in the line about politics and religion"

He barely talks about the game. He doesn't break it down passionately - even if he's totally against the series, break it down from that preview. Tell us what isn't working for you - not one aspect, but ALL aspects of it based upon you playing, not watching. Don't tell us what you're drinking or how cool the rooftop experience is - none of that matters to the readers. They aren't there to read about you, but to read your thoughts about the game - honest thoughts, good or bad.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

That Rockband article is likely the absolute worst piece I've ever read from this industry. I get it... you want the new direction to be road trips with the band and vision quests in the sweat lodge, but you can't do that with you standing in a corner, refusing to engage with the band and writing about your completely uninteresting and irrelevant experience as a contemptuous wallflower, who learned and shared absolutely nothing.

Coincidentally, also yesterday, Bob Mackey probably unintentionally succeeded at doing what that guy thought he was doing, over at usgamer, by writing about his experience working in a Game Jam team: Welcome to the Jam: The Making of Super Street Harassment RPG

 

[Interficium]

When I imagined the death knell for New Games Journalism I definitely wouldn't have guessed it's headline would be "Rock Band 4 is doing a lot of the fun things you want it to do."

 

[NumberThree]

Why are you thinking that what you're describing is the only other option for a preview? They could absolutely send someone that hasn't been a fan of music games or someone that liked them at one point and no longer does to see if there's anything about Rock Band 4 that changes their mind. That preview would end up giving both those that like RB and those that haven't liked it a good idea of whether they'd like RB4. It wouldn't be like every other preview that was likely coming from a fan of the franchise. Instead you don't really get any of that. A site isn't doing anyone any favors by sending someone that's annoyed that they even have to cover a certain game.

I'm pretty sure that event was during the E3 Judges' week and therefore whoever Polygon sent to that is who ended up covering Rock Band. They also saw a lot of other games during the week, and I'm sure no outlet had someone there who cared about all the games.

He could've skipped writing anything about Rock Band considering he didn't have much to say about it, of course. Or learn about the game even if he didn't care about it.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

Polygon's preview is basically a middle finger to everybody who clicked on their article and was genuinely interested in the game.

 

[BY2K]

Even Major Nelson liked it.

https://twitter.com/majornelson/status/605533230339481600

Larry HrybVerified account
‏@majornelson

@scully1888 Enjoyed your open letter to game journalism. Nice job

 

[chaobreaker]

Even Major Nelson liked it.

https://twitter.com/majornelson/status/605533230339481600

To be fair, it would probably be in Major Nelson's and Microsoft's best interest if journalists went at each other for publishing articles about how they don't care much for the games being previewed in these events. Games that can be played on their console.

 

[Myggen]

To be fair, it would probably be in Major Nelson's and Microsoft's best interest if journalists went at each other for publishing articles about how they don't care much for the games being previewed in these events. Games that can be played on their console.

Yeah. I didn't find that Polygon article to be very good, but Major Nelson and other PR people are the last kind of people I'll listen to when we're discussing what makes good or bad journalism.

 

[Flavius]

Any disdain I might have is overwhelmed by my appreciation for the writer trying something different.

 

[mclem]

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

Great article.

I'm sure I've used the phrase "Rambly and train-of-thoughty" myself, although I'm damned if I can find where.

 

[Par Score]

The worst thing about that Polygon 'preview' is that it's just... there.

It's not funny, or insightful, there's no real deeper meaning. It's just a story about a bloke who doesn't care for rhythm games attending an event where a rhythm game is being previewed, as told by said bloke, interspersed with a few PR note bullet points.

It does tell us something about the writer, I suppose, though I'm not sure too many people really care about the disdainful ennui of Colin Campbell.

 

[jschreier]

First of all, you should all -- including Chris -- know that this wasn't just some random preview event; it was part of Judge's Week, a four-day tour where various publishers invite journalists to demo their games before E3. Since most outlets only send one or two people to cover everything (especially outlets that pay their own way and don't let publishers pay for their travel, an unfortunately small list that includes both Polygon and Kotaku), it's inevitable that there will be some judges who have no interest in some of the games that are there. It's not like he just flew out to a Rock Band preview event knowing that he hates Rock Band and wouldn't have anything good to say about it -- he was there for the whole tour.

I agree with those who think it's laudable that Colin tried something different -- who really needs to read another Rock Band preview? -- although it's clear his piece didn't resonate with people. I think if you're going to do the whole travelogue-tinged-with-ennui thing, you need to offer value to your readers (in the form of humor, or interesting questions, or emotional moments) so they don't feel like you've wasted their time, which is easier said than done. Another option is to spend less time on previews in the first place.

 

[Foggy]

First of all, you should all -- including Chris -- know that this wasn't just some random preview event; it was part of Judge's Week, a four-day tour where various publishers invite journalists to demo their games before E3. Since most outlets only send one or two people to cover everything (especially outlets that pay their own way and don't let publishers pay for their travel, an unfortunately small list that includes both Polygon and Kotaku), it's inevitable that there will be some judges who have no interest in some of the games that are there. It's not like he just flew out to a Rock Band preview event knowing that he hates Rock Band and wouldn't have anything good to say about it -- he was there for the whole tour.

You really think this mitigates any criticism thrown his way? Like people somehow thought his casual disaffection wasn't earned, but knowing he was on a four-day demo tour now sheds new light on it?

 

[jschreier]

You really think this mitigates any criticism thrown his way? Like people somehow thought his casual disaffection wasn't earned, but knowing he was on a four-day demo tour now sheds new light on it?

No, I'm just giving you more context. Chris Scullion's piece has an anecdote where he turned down a preview event because he wasn't interested in the games -- that doesn't really apply here.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

I agree with those who think it's laudable that Colin tried something different -- who really needs to read another Rock Band preview? -- although it's clear his piece didn't resonate with people. I think if you're going to do the whole travelogue-tinged-with-ennui thing, you need to offer value to your readers (in the form of humor, or interesting questions, or emotional moments) so they don't feel like you've wasted their time, which is easier said than done. Another option is to spend less time on previews in the first place.

No, it's not laudable. Even when done well, this kind of article's only purpose is for the writer to try to show off how sophisticated they are and how much better they are than everybody else.

You don't like a genre and you're sent to a preview event? Skip writing the article. Or be professional - give your readers a list of features, interview staff & other people about the game - you know, do your job. Don't write condescending tripe.

 

[creatchee]

No, it's not laudable. Even when done well, this kind of article's only purpose is for the writer to try to show off how sophisticated they are and how much better they are than everybody else.

You don't like a genre and you're sent to a preview event? Skip writing the article. Or do a professional job - give your readers a list of features, interview staff & other people about the game - you know, do your job. Don't write condescending tripe.

So you want the writer to write what you want him to write, not what he wants to write?

 

[Keegs]

So you want the writer to write what you want him to write, not what he wants to write?

Well, that's kind of his job. It's to inform the reader.

 

[SolidSnakex]

So you want the writer to write what you want him to write, not what he wants to write?

It's a preview, the point of them is to give the reader a good idea of what to expect from the game. Not to tell readers how stupid videogames are and why you're angry that you even have to cover them.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

So you want the writer to write what you want him to write, not what he wants to write?

I'd like the writer to write something that matches the title of the article. If you started a thread here called "Rock Band 4" and then spent the opening post talking about how much you hated Rock Band and how all its fans are losers and aren't you sophisticated for realizing how video games are just pushing buttons, I think there's a good chance you'd get banned (or at the very least, lose thread starting privileges).

 

[RichyDevil]

Never mind

 

[RockTurtle]

So you want the writer to write what you want him to write, not what he wants to write?

i don't think anybody wanted him to slobber up to the PR points and people (that's another issue in games media), but the absolute disdain and smugness from the article was NOT something you would expect from a preview.

there was no technical mishap that required stringent attention before people put down money in pre-orders that needed to be unearthed. or for the current theme in games media, no glaring "social issue" that needed to be clinically studied for moral ambiguity.

i like it when games media take PR and companies through the grinder. but this wasn't someone trying to uncover a seedy practice.

it basically reads as an opinion piece hitjob.

 

[creatchee]

Well, that's kind of his job. It's to inform the reader.

It's a preview, the point of them is to give the reader a good idea of what to expect from the game. Not to tell readers how stupid videogames are and why you're angry that you even have to cover them.

I'd like the writer to write something that matches the title of the article. If you started a thread here called "Rock Band 4" and then spent the opening post talking about how much you hated Rock Band and how all its fans are losers and aren't you sophisticated for realizing how video games are just pushing buttons, I think there's a good chance you'd get banned (or at the very least, lose thread starting privileges).

While I agree with you all in spirit, it's still supposed to be his impressions of the experience. And if he's not interested, I'd rather him tell me than pretend it's sunshine, rainbows, and lollipops. I don't need to live my life under the false assumption that everyone loves what I love. I wish MORE journalists were more honest in regards to their lack of interest towards certain games. If anything, it makes the landscape of articles less homogenous.

Experiment: let's change the game in question to, I dunno... Hatred. If there was a press event and Campbell went there, would everyone be as mad if he wrote this kind of article?

 

[Interfectum]

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.

Exactly.

Even in the worst of the worst previews that sound like ads or viral marketing, if you can look past the hyperbole, you can still glean information from it and form your own opinion.

I honestly couldn't believe what I was reading in that Polygon article. Pretentious, narcissistic garbage. Reads like a parody of a hipster covering video games.

 

[Petrae]

So you want the writer to write what you want him to write, not what he wants to write?

The writer can write whatever he wants, as long as he doesn't misrepresent what he's writing about. If this was an "Opinion" piece, with a more appropriate title (such as "Video Games Are Stupid" or "Rock Band 4 in the Eyes of Someone Who Doesn't Care"), I'd be fine with it... because I never would have wasted my time and effort in going to the site and reading something that I had no interest in reading.

The fact that the piece is so horribly misrepresented-- not only by its title, but by its classification as a "preview"-- opens it, the writer, and the outlet, up to the criticism that it's receiving.

Let Campbell complain on a blog about how much he didn't want to be there. Don't waste my time by wrapping it into a preview.

While I agree with you all in spirit, it's still supposed to be his impressions of the experience. And if he's not interested, I'd rather him tell me than pretend it's sunshine, rainbows, and lollipops. I don't need to live my life under the false assumption that everyone loves what I love. I wish MORE journalists were more honest in regards to their lack of interest towards certain games. If anything, it makes the landscape of articles less homogenous.

Experiment: let's change the game in question to, I dunno... Hatred. If there was a press event and Campbell went there, would everyone be as mad if he wrote this kind of article?

I don't give a shit what the journalist is interested in. I'm interested in what the journalist is covering. The idea of making games press about the writer instead of the games is not at all appealing to me. There's liking or not liking a game, but this piece barely addresses the game at all-- and that's after paying the toll of reading a long-winded and unnecessary "poor me" narrative to get there.

And, yeah, if Campbell pulled this stunt for E3 press event coverage, I'd be equally incensed-- if not more so.

 

[jschreier]

No, it's not laudable. Even when done well, this kind of article's only purpose is for the writer to try to show off how sophisticated they are and how much better they are than everybody else.

You don't like a genre and you're sent to a preview event? Skip writing the article. Or be professional - give your readers a list of features, interview staff & other people about the game - you know, do your job. Don't write condescending tripe.

If most readers come away from an article thinking "this is condescending tripe" or "the writer just wanted to show off how sophisticated they are" then the author probably didn't do a great job. I still think it's laudable for any writer to try something unorthodox and creative, especially for a game preview event. The whole "here's a list of features and my thoughts on a 20-minute demo!" write-up feels like an antiquated model that's growing more and more irrelevant every day. Writing something that actively pisses people off is not the solution, of course, and like I said before, a piece like this has to offer value to readers in order to work (which is not easy). But to decide that a preview must be a list of features and quotes is to do a disservice to your readers.

 

[duckroll]

I like personal perspectives, but I feel they should be relevant to the main point of the story. If the point of the article is to cover a given game, I certainly appreciate a personal touch in what that game means to the person covering it. But if the vibe is basically "I wish I wasn't covering this game", then maybe I feel such a preview shouldn't exist to begin with. Or it should be re-purposed as a more general editorial about the systemic failure in the business which results in someone who is not interested in a game being forced to cover it.

 

[Neuromancer]

You don't like a genre and you're sent to a preview event? Skip writing the article.

I agree, this would have been the more professional thing to do in this instance.

I still think it's laudable for any writer to try something unorthodox and creative, especially for a game preview event.

This piece would have been better off as an editorial about PR events, or the authors feelings about the genre; not a preview which has a universally agreed upon purpose - information and opinions about an upcoming game that we all aren't lucky enough to experience for ourselves. I don't think doing something different, just for the sake of doing something different, is inherently valuable.

 

[Robert at Zeboyd Games]

But to decide that a preview must be a list of features and quotes is to do a disservice to your readers.

A preview doesn't have to be a list of features & quotes. I'm just saying that when you're unqualified to write a good preview & want to put in as little effort as possible, a list of features & some quotes is the bare minimum necessary to produce adequate work. Seriously, this article is the equivalent of a high school student getting an essay assignment and then turning in a paper that just goes on about how stupid the essay assignment was.

It boggles the mind how a site that does such excellent long feature work is so horrendous at everything else.

 

[conweller]

Colin is literally a NEVER. And Polygon posted a NEVER piece categorized as a preview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOI4XJecOc0

 

[Flavius]

I like personal perspectives, but I feel they should be relevant to the main point of the story. If the point of the article is to cover a given game, I certainly appreciate a personal touch in what that game means to the person covering it. But if the vibe is basically "I wish I wasn't covering this game", then maybe I feel such a preview shouldn't exist to begin with. Or it should be re-purposed as a more general editorial about the systemic failure in the business which results in someone who is not interested in a game being forced to cover it.

Clearly, you aren't the only one, but I'm not sure how folks are interpreting this piece as him not wanting to cover the game. He seems genuinely baffled by those who like this genre, that's true. But I don't see the piece as being condescending, nor disdainful of the game. I think it's clear from his writing that he enjoyed the exercise, but wants to emphasize that it isn't his bag. Perhaps he put too fine a point on it.

He doesn't dig crowds or loud noise. It's a noisy, party game. But it looks like the people who dig it will like it. Here are a few facts.

It's like every other preview out there, but it's not.

 

[RockTurtle]

You know, it would have been an interesting article if it was about how marketed and commercialized game marketers are to the point where they try to butter up journalists and press, lavishly peppering journos with goodies and nice rooms, all that jazz. Maybe talk about the relationship between PR and journalists, how from his perspective it may just all be getting boring and too much, unauthentic, full of saccharine hype.

Buuuuuuuuut we get a dude complaining about creme puffs and the nihilism of consumerism maaaaaan. Like, seriously, come on. You can do better here guys...

i'd read that!

 

[JohngPR]

I'm all for adding your own personal touch to a preview, but when it takes all of the focus away from what you're supposed to be covering and puts it on yourself, you did a bad job covering that game.

 

[Jumplion]

i'd read that!

After the Florida raptor storm came about I've become super jaded with what annoys me in journalism. So long as I get what they're trying to do in these sorts of unorthodox pieces, I'll be somewhat sympathetic.

Think that pic nails what he was going for, actually. Still, shame for a missed opportunity for an interesting editorial.

 

[Puaru1]

What Polygon should be doing is probably up to them. Writing yet another preview piece from an event that mass produces identical articles was probably boring to the journalist (and me). So he tried something different. Perhaps it did not quite work, but I appreciate the effort.

Polygon makes mistakes all the time, if they are way off the mark, they need to be informed, and the majority of comments are doing so.

Clearly the entire genre is boring to the journalist, so yes, the article doesn't work. If readers don't call these articles like they see them, we let stuff like Patricia Hernandez's cards against humanity consent article and Stephen Totilo's "not important" comment towards Doritogate slide by unchallenged, which does not do any favors for the writers themselves or game journalism.

 

[RedSwirl]

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

Great article.

Holy shit.

I remember someone drawing a comic about journalism in general. It was a single panel with a guy about to throw a dart at a board displaying different random topics and subjects. The guy is saying something like "let's see what I have to become an expert on today." That's what you have to do in journalism basically -- become well-researched on whatever you're writing a story about at that time.

I care about Rock Band probably about as much as Colin Campbell does, possibly even less, but if I had no choice but to preview Rock Band 4, I would probably still try to look up what the previous games were about and why people play Rock Band. I'd probably start out the article by saying I haven't been totally into the Rock Band series, but I would definitely try to know about it. I've had to do it before while freelancing. This is actually why I've been playing so many old-ass games over the last few years -- to become better-versed on certain genres and whatnot.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

I don't need to live my life under the false assumption that everyone loves what I love.

Experiment: let's change the game in question to, I dunno... Hatred. If there was a press event and Campbell went there, would everyone be as mad if he wrote this kind of article?

People need to stop assuming this is a "waaa critics don't reaffirm my tastes for me" situation. I give two shits about music games myself and it's not my genre either, but I can vibe with anything and have fun with anyone. The content of the article was boring masturbation from someone who couldn't even take their pants off, let alone get it up.

If he went to a Hatred event, and wrote about being outside on the patio smoking loosies and reminiscing about his ex, everyone would have the same reaction that this is an article about the author, who either isn't interesting enough to read about or doesn't have the chops to present himself as such, being substituted as supplemental reading material about an upcoming video game. Anyone who clicked on the link to read about Rockband was rickrolled into reading a diary entry full of grown man angst.

 

[SodiumBenzoate]

Holy shit.

I remember someone drawing a comic about journalism in general. It was a single panel with a guy about to throw a dart at a board displaying different random topics and subjects. The guy is saying something like "let's see what I have to become an expert on today." That's what you have to do in journalism basically -- become well-researched on whatever you're writing a story about at that time.

I care about Rock Band probably about as much as Colin Campbell does, possibly even less, but if I had no choice but to preview Rock Band 4, I would probably still try to look up what the previous games were about and why people play Rock Band. I'd probably start out the article by saying I haven't been totally into the Rock Band series, but I would definitely try to know about it. I've had to do it before while freelancing. This is actually why I've been playing so many old-ass games over the last few years -- to become better-versed on certain genres and whatnot.

I'm more curious about the editor who read this steaming mess of an article and thought 'our readers are served by this article' or even 'this is the sort of content our website should be proud of and will help us gain and retain readers'. What sort of threshold does this article pass that makes it publishable?


It's baffling.