Support NeoGAF

[Zeouterlimits]

The tone of the discussion turned dark pretty early on.

To be fair, the whole situation became dark once the edits were made and Rob was out.

I'm much happier there's been some solid discussion in the press in the past few days, and Christian's post is a good example of the postive honesty that has come out in the whole thing.

If I've come off as generally an asshat Zeouterlimits, it wasn't my intent and I apologize.

Yeah. Halo 4 is another one of those games where I know folks working on it. I have some criticism but on the whole I'm pretty floored by what I've been playing and the sheer scope of the package they've put together.

FWIW, same thing as with All-Stars, it would be cool for projects worked on by people I know and like to be be great but I don't think they're going to suddenly change our personal relationship if I call a duck a duck. Or maybe if they would then that's a whole other subject about what sort of relationship we have.

And flip that around too. When I say something stupid I hope my friends will set me straight. If anything it's better, though maybe harder, hearing it from them if that makes any sense.

Certainly not an asshat Garnett, know you're a good guy, that's why I've been a far for like 6 years now (that seems like a long time).
It's just that on WC, you and Jeff have made a few uncomfortable comments about the community that had me wondering how much you actually liked your current set of active fans.

Anyway, I didn't actually mean to make you jump into the H4 friend topic so much, more that you haven't really disliked but neither gotten into previous titles hugely either.

 

[Baconsammy]

And now you've compared Andrea to Luke and Shane?

Yes, because comparing similar qualities about people is the same thing as saying they're exactly the same in every single way.

The fact that you expect more after having never received more says more about you than about me. I'm well aware of the state of "journalism" in regards to gaming. I expect nothing, and I'm almost 100 percent of the time rewarded with nothing. This latest internet forum jihad is amusing, though. If nothing else it reflects that a lot of people want the gaming press to improve. Unfortunately that's never going to happen until the ranks are filled with competent journalists.

 

[Massa]

Yes, because comparing similar qualities about people is the same thing as saying they're exactly the same in every single way.

The fact that you expect more after having never received more says more about you than about me. I'm well aware of the state of "journalism" in regards to gaming. I expect nothing, and I'm almost 100 percent of the time rewarded with nothing. This latest internet forum jihad is amusing, though. If nothing else it reflects that a lot of people want the gaming press to improve. Unfortunately that's never going to happen until the ranks are filled with competent journalists.

I have no problem with the critics I listen to having very strong preferences towards certain games. Now you find me the episode where Shane, Luke, Big Fun, Brian Leahy or anyone excitedly discussed a game with "the PR rep said that this will be awesome because" ten times over. Andrea's done that often on Weekend Confirmed. When she doesn't like something she can't articulate why no matter how hard Garnett tries to get it out of her, and it always ends up with cringe worthy comments.

Andrea is probably a very entertaining person, she's got a great laugh and she's a fine fit for the Youtube audience. Garnett on the other hand has a history of podcasting with some incredibly talented people that know their shit about video games. It's a completely different level of discussion.

Now, I don't see in debating this topic with someone who can't see the difference or thinks so low of this podcast as you seem to, so just ignore me and go back to laughing at the latest internet "jihad".

 

[Baconsammy]

I have no problem with the critics I listen to having very strong preferences towards certain games. Now you find me the episode where Shane, Luke, Big Fun, Brian Leahy or anyone excitedly discussed a game with "the PR rep said that this will be awesome because" ten times over. Andrea's done that often on Weekend Confirmed. When she doesn't like something she can't articulate why no matter how hard Garnett tries to get it out of her, and it always ends up with cringe worthy comments.

Andrea is probably a very entertaining person, she's got a great laugh and she's a fine fit for the Youtube audience. Garnett on the other hand has a history of podcasting with some incredibly talented people that know their shit about video games. It's a completely different level of discussion.

Now, I don't see in debating this topic with someone who can't see the difference or thinks so low of this podcast as you seem to, so just ignore me and go back to laughing at the latest internet "jihad".

Wring your hands all you want, I dont care. It's your right, and it's a gaming forum. Where better to do that? I just dont want the podcast to be consumed with this nonsense. It's always been about the games, so leave it that way. If Andrea's a shill and Garnett hasn't noticed that by now, he's not the most observant/intelligent person then is he? Have a little faith in his judge of character. I never said Shane/Luke were identical to Andrea. I did say that they never hid their fanboy tendencies, regardless of the quality of the product. Christ, Shane even pimped Haze. He constantly sounded like a guy interviewing for a gig at Sony. That was only one aspect of him though, and there was also a lot to like about him. Andrea isn't much different, although she is like the rest of the WC crew and never seems to ever talk about a game she's actually played all the way through. In the old days, it seemed like that happened more often.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

When she doesn't like something she can't articulate why no matter how hard Garnett tries to get it out of her

I know I brought it up already, but her "But...I mean...but..." during the Wii U tablet discussion is a clear example of this. She had no reason for her complaints and was dumbstruck when the rest of the crew didn't agree with her.

Personally, I don't think she knows enough about games or the game industry as a whole to be a valuable contributor to discussions. I understand why Garnett might feel the need for a female voice on the show, but he can do better.

 

[Baconsammy]

I know I brought it up already, but her "But...I mean...but..." during the Wii U tablet discussion is a clear example of this. She had no reason for her complaints and was dumbstruck when the rest of the crew didn't agree with her.

Personally, I don't think she knows enough about games or the game industry as a whole to be a valuable contributor to discussions. I understand why Garnett might feel the need for a female voice on the show, but he can do better.

This I definitely agree with. There's so many knowledgable females he could go with. I just don't know how many he legitimately has access to though.

It this context, it shows excitement for something, which I think it something you should hope journalists / critics / personalities show if they actually are excited about something.

Amen

 

[jstevenson]

gah, I really wish I hadn't had to cancel on WC this week because I wish I could be involved in this discussion this week.

also - Andrea re-tweeting a t-shirt contest doesn't seem like a big deal to me, in that she's not trying to win herself a t-shirt (she could just call, tweet or IM Ubi PR). But it's something she's personally interested in and thinks people who want her opinion would be interested in. Different situation then say a contest just for journalists to tweet something, imo.

It this context, it shows excitement for something, which I think it something you should hope journalists / critics / personalities show if they actually are excited about something.

 

[mik]

It this context, it shows excitement for something, which I think it something you should hope journalists / critics / personalities show if they actually are excited about something.

Perhaps, but retweeting (regurgitating, like a bird, really) Ubi's PR tweet of "Retweet if you're getting ACIII today!!!" is worlds different than her offering her own opinion as a critic--in her own words, with her own tweet. No one would give a shit if she tweeted "Assassin's Creed III is out today and it's terrific. You should get it!" Because that's her offering her opinion, not being PRB0T 3000™.

 

[jstevenson]

Perhaps, but retweeting (regurgitating, like a baby chick, really) Ubi's PR tweet of "Retweet if you're getting ACIII today!!!" is worlds different than her offering her own opinion as a critic--in her own words, with her own tweet. No one would give a shit if she tweeted "Assassin's Creed III is out today and it's terrific. You should get it!" Because that's her offering her opinion, not being PRB0T 3000™.

Twitter re-tweeting is part of the game though. Maybe some people who read her feed want an Assassin's Creed t-shirt and she thought people would be interested.

If a journalist retweets something I say about an Insomniac game, or something insomniac tweets about a ratchet game, that's just using twitter, not necessarily regurgitating.

The medium is highly important to the context here.

 

[mik]

I absolutely agree that the medium is important here. Just for an entirely different reason.

In this case, simply having these people retweet your canned message gives you one more avenue to reach the consumer without any sort of critical filter. It's lazy and allows publishers/pr to completely control their message (and further underscores the question--if they're just passing along the corporate message, what are these people for?).

 

[jstevenson]

I absolutely agree that the medium is important here. Just for an entirely different reason.

In this case, simply having these people retweet your canned message gives you one more avenue to reach the consumer without any sort of critical filter. It's lazy and allows publishers/pr to completely control their message (and further underscores the question--if they're just passing along the corporate message, what are these people for?).

You don't need journalists to filer twitter. Twitter is a method of communicating directly to the audience. If Andrea believes she is part of the audience (a fan of AC3) and believes her followers are part of that audience, then I don't see the issue.

Now, if Ubi sent an e-mail out to all the press saying "tweet this hash tag" and we'll give someone a trip to Hawaii, or an Xbox 360, or a 60" plasma, that's totally different. But in this situation, all Andrea is retweeting something you can publicly see, and she has, over the course of her twitter feed, made it clear she loves AC, and is very excited about AC3.

I just don't see any attempt to mislead or profit from this, she's just trying to point out something she thought was cool (a contest to win a t-shirt). There's a fuckton of noise on twitter, not everything has to be signal, and some things you may think is signal others may dismiss as noise and vice versa

 

[Brad Grenz]

Yeah, it's a really big difference between retweeting an open contest for a small value item your followers might be interested in, and being at an industry event where you've been asked to promote a hashtag for a chance to win something with significantly more value.

 

[antitrop]

I have no problem with Andrea's tweet about AC3 at all. My problems with her lie solely in her contribution as a co-host of the podcast and what she brings to the table.

She can retweet whatever the fuck she wants, I don't give a shit.

 

[krae_man]

I hope if Andrea is brought up in whatever discussion about this happens in the next episode you don't just talk about the AC3 tweet and nothing else.

We're aware on it's own it's innocent but it looks different in light of everything else. I hope you don't try and paint it as "Ah ha! Internet which hunt grasping at straws and hating on women" or something and ignore the stronger criticisms against her.

Stuff like how it seems like she or her employer were paid to promote Need for Speed and she didn't disclose that before talking about the game. In contrast to Jeff Cannata who always says "warning Game X sponsored TRS so ignore everything I say".

Or Garnett saying "I always ignore the PR sheets except for a quick glance at the end to make sure I don't call something by the wrong name", Meanwhile Andrea seems to read them off almost verbatim and got called out on it a month and a half ago while talking about Borderlands 2 well before this stuff blew up.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

All the journalism talk over the last week reminds me of the gaming hobby talk on this podcast a few months back. I'm fine talking about / admitting to playing games with coworkers and such - But I wouldn't in a hundred years admit to following games press.

Gaming podcasts are my guiltiest of pleasures. I even subscribe to a some "cleansing" non-gaming podcasts. I don't actually listen to them, but seeing them in my feed knowing I could listen to them if I was a better person helps ease the shame

 

[eznark]

I absolutely agree that the medium is important here. Just for an entirely different reason.

In this case, simply having these people retweet your canned message gives you one more avenue to reach the consumer without any sort of critical filter. It's lazy and allows publishers/pr to completely control their message (and further underscores the question--if they're just passing along the corporate message, what are these people for?).

Their role is to make James' life easier, obviously. I think James is awesome and love when he is on any show except his own, which was not good, but his opinion is generally irrelevant here. PR guys having unchecked control of the message got the industry to this point, should they really contribute to any meaningful discussion of change?

As for Andrea, this episode pretty much cemented my opinion of her. Garnett if you want a female voice get Kat on the show, or Luke.

 

[krae_man]

Their role is to make James' life easier, obviously. I think James is awesome and love when he is on any show except his own, which was not good, but his opinion is generally irrelevant here. PR guys having unchecked control of the message got the industry to this point, should they really contribute to any meaningful discussion of change?

As for Andrea, this episode pretty much cemented my opinion of her. Garnett if you want a female voice get Kat on the show, or Luke.

Kat would be awesome, but she isn't in LA.

Now, if Ubi sent an e-mail out to all the press saying "tweet this hash tag" and we'll give someone a trip to Hawaii, or an Xbox 360, or a 60" plasma, that's totally different. But in this situation, all Andrea is retweeting something you can publicly see, and she has, over the course of her twitter feed, made it clear she loves AC, and is very excited about AC3.

Interesting choice of words seeing as something just like that happened.

Anyway, just like to say that you're fine on the show. For the most part you don't talk about your own games(not that you could since Insomniac doesn't make a game a week) and when you do, you don't sound like you're reading off the PR sheet point for point.

 

[Jake Tower]

Or Garnett saying "I always ignore the PR sheets except for a quick glance at the end to make I don't call something by the wrong game", Meanwhile Andrea seems to read them off almost verbatim and got called out on it a month and a half ago while talking about Borderlands 2 well before this stuff blew up.

Here's a clip from 1UP Yours where Shawn Elliott busts Shane for literally following the Konami PR script following his special trip to Japan to play MGS4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zddwS815r1k&feature=youtu.be

 

[Baconsammy]

Their role is to make James' life easier, obviously. I think James is awesome and love when he is on any show except his own, which was not good, but his opinion is generally irrelevant here. PR guys having unchecked control of the message got the industry to this point, should they really contribute to any meaningful discussion of change?

As for Andrea, this episode pretty much cemented my opinion of her. Garnett if you want a female voice get Kat on the show, or Luke.

Shots fired.

 

[Margalis]

Yeah, it's a really big difference between retweeting an open contest for a small value item your followers might be interested in...

She let her followers know about the contest by doing what amounts to advertising, and for them to enter the contest they also have to do what amounts to advertising. That is, in fact, the entire point of the contest - to provide essentially free advertising to Ubi.

I would rather have critics or personalities or whatever you want to call them not do advertising.

I agree this is not the worst sin in the word, but I do want a "critic" or whatever we are calling people today to be independent-minded. I don't really need the opinion of someone who repeats PR - I can go directly to the PR for that. Retweeting exactly what PR tells you to say is just offensively non-critical and lazy to me - two attributes I don't want in a critic.

Allowing Ubi PR to use your Twitter feed for advertising purposes is something that should make people think twice.

I'd like to see a general pushback against "advertise our game for us" promotions in general, especially from members of the games press.

But it's something she's personally interested in and thinks people who want her opinion would be interested in.

She didn't share her opinion - she shared verbatim PR.

 

[Neuromancer]

Stuff like how it seems like she or her employer were paid to promote Need for Speed and she didn't disclose that before talking about the game. [

Yeah I find this part very troubling.

 

[Baconsammy]

Yeah I find this part very troubling.

If you follow Machinima at all it becomes quite obvious what they're being told to pimp. That's why Andrea's (and anyone from Machina) opinion of Borderlands 2 pre-release was useless to me, made even more laughable when she was commenting on the game as a whole after admitting to only having played to level 12. That's why none of this garbage bothers me, because my opinion of the industry is rock bottom to begin with.

 

[JABEE]

You don't need journalists to filer twitter. Twitter is a method of communicating directly to the audience. If Andrea believes she is part of the audience (a fan of AC3) and believes her followers are part of that audience, then I don't see the issue.

Now, if Ubi sent an e-mail out to all the press saying "tweet this hash tag" and we'll give someone a trip to Hawaii, or an Xbox 360, or a 60" plasma, that's totally different. But in this situation, all Andrea is retweeting something you can publicly see, and she has, over the course of her twitter feed, made it clear she loves AC, and is very excited about AC3.

I just don't see any attempt to mislead or profit from this, she's just trying to point out something she thought was cool (a contest to win a t-shirt). There's a fuckton of noise on twitter, not everything has to be signal, and some things you may think is signal others may dismiss as noise and vice versa

There's also the stuff about Machinima being paid monetary bonuses for live streams that Andrea hosts. Even if you're not doing official reviews of the game, that's something that should be disclosed when you go on WC to talk candidly about a game. The Assassin's Creed tweet was promoting a live stream she was doing for Ubisoft that I'm guessing was payed for by Ubisoft. I don't think it's unfair to say she is influenced by those connections.

 

[Margalis]

I will also say that, maybe I'm just ignorant, but until yesterday I had no idea what Machinima actually does. I assumed they just made goofy machinima videos, and that the Halo thing is just an extremely elaborate goofy machinima video.

The fact that Machinima gets tons of copies of games that they then distribute to partners along with payment to essentially promote the game is news to me, and what games they promote is extremely relevant where Andrea is involved.

 

[frequency]

I don't feel Shane or Luke ever tried to hide their biases. I am 100% totally fine with people preferring things. It's human.

Like I said before, the only time I feel there's a problem is when there's question about honesty. If Andrea truly feels Borderlands 2 is perfect and Need For Speed is incredibly awesome or the Marvel MMO truly has way more potential than all the other MMOs, then explain to me why. Don't recite some PR speak about those games. Explain to me, in your own words, why you feel the way you do about these games. What past experiences have you had with the genre? What other past game can this be compared to? What specifically about these games impresses you? How is what this game does better than what other games do?
It's also a matter of word choice. Do not ever tell me to pre-order a game. Or tell me that a game is perfect before you've even played the final retail build.

The AC3 t-shirt tweet is nothing to me. Even within the context of everything else, I do not care. What I do care about is that the place she works for deals with money directly from a game company - "payola" or whatever... despite saying it's "bullcocky" to even suggest such a system could possibly exist.
It was dishonest. If she was dishonest about this one thing, then it brings to question everything else she has ever said.

LEVEL 12!?

It's perfect. You should pre-order it.

 

[antitrop]

If you follow Machinima at all it becomes quite obvious what they're being told to pimp. That's why Andrea's (and anyone from Machina) opinion of Borderlands 2 pre-release was useless to me, made even more laughable when she was commenting on the game as a whole after admitting to only having played to level 12. That's why none of this garbage bothers me, because my opinion of the industry is rock bottom to begin with.

LEVEL 12!?

 

[Baconsammy]

I don't feel Shane or Luke ever tried to hide their biases. I am 100% totally fine with people preferring things. It's human.

Andrea isn't hiding her biases either. She works for Machinima. She admits to working for them. She's happy to work for them. Garnett tells you from the get-go who she works for. That should automatically tell you that her opinion about games should be taken with a huge grain of salt. That site is in business to do one thing - pimp shit. They have the most followers on Youtube for a reason - they pimp shit better than anyone else. Their goal isn't honesty. Their goal is to make you buy what they're being paid to sell. Her job is to create new shows on Machinima to pimp even more shit and hopefully increase followers. That's what they do. Probably the wrong guest to have on the show if Garnett's goal is unbiased opinions, which it clearly isn't since he has people on from development houses quite often.

LEVEL 12!?

Yeah, which I guess is an improvement over watching promo material, playing a staged demo and proclaiming the same thing. Progress!

 

[LQX]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

 

[jstevenson]

Probably the wrong guest to have on the show if Garnett's goal is unbiased opinions, which it clearly isn't since he has people on from development houses quite often.

Is there any sort of truth around "unbiased" opinions? I think the goal is to have insightful opinions. You may not be able to fully trust Garnett's recommendation on PS All-Stars, but he may have insight that's useful in you learning about the game (especially considering!).

Similarly, dev house folks may not be the folks you want to have on for hard hitting criticism - but a lot of times we bring insight from having worked on games.

I guess my point is, if you want a show that spends 2 hours discussing games from a completely analytical point of view w/ absolutely zero bias, well, I think it'd be hard to find a group for that. I think Garnett has done a good job bringing a good group together with varied opinions, interests, and opinions / thoughts on the industry. But as one of said people, I'm INCREDIBLY biased. ;-)



And final thing on Andrea, I can't speak well to Machinima's editorial policies. I mainly just wanted to shoot down the absurd AC t-shirt tweet. Obviously Machinima has a unique position in terms of being an official/unofficial licensee and making a lot of money off of Machinima created in certain developers' and publishers' IPs, while also sponsoring new/exclusive in-universe content. I have no idea how they structure all of that (and if it varies from pub to pub / IP to IP), but you all are probably right to ask those questions of Machinima, as long-term knowing how they treat all of that can only strengthen the relationship between the outlet and audience.

 

[Baconsammy]

Is there any sort of truth around "unbiased" opinions? I think the goal is to have insightful opinions. You may not be able to fully trust Garnett's recommendation on PS All-Stars, but he may have insight that's useful in you learning about the game (especially considering!).

It's what I believe Garnett's goal for the podcast has always been. Insight into games. Insight into the industry. etc etc. Not hard hitting editorials. That's why having guests such as Andrea, Shane, and yourself never bothers me. It's a fun video game-centric podcast. Not 60 Minutes.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

Agreed. She's not hiding who she is, or what she is. I'll continue to bash her for some stupid observations though. Like rage quitting Sleeping Dogs at the easiest part in the game.

 

[Margalis]

Developers have a completely obvious bias that is impossible to hide. They can be handled well or poorly but the audience understands that developers are going to promote their stuff. (I thought the Amalur guys on the show were handled pretty poorly but the Spec-Ops and Borderlands guys were good)

Someone who is on the show as a critic and does not represent any game or developer does not have any obvious bias the audience should be aware of - which is why disclosure is so important.

 

[frequency]

Andrea isn't hiding her biases either. She works for Machinima. She admits to working for them. She's happy to work for them. Garnett tells you from the get-go who she works for. That should automatically tell you that her opinion about games should be taken with a huge grain of salt. That site is in business to do one thing - pimp shit. They have the most followers on Youtube for a reason - they pimp shit better than anyone else. Their goal isn't honesty. Their goal is to make you buy what they're being paid to sell. Her job is to create new shows on Machinima to pimp even more shit and hopefully increase followers. That's what they do. Probably the wrong guest to have on the show if Garnett's goal is unbiased opinions, which it clearly isn't since he has people on from development houses quite often.

I'm not looking for "unbiased opinions" because I think that's impossible. I've posted about it in this thread. Being a human means you'll have a bias. I'm 100% completely totally fine with people like James Stevenson being on the show. I'm 100% completely totally fine with anyone with any bias being on the show.

I'm not fine with pretending and even loudly decrying the existence of a "payola system" despite there being exactly that at the place she works for.

I'll say it again: my problem here is with honesty.
If before reading the PR sheet for Need for Speed to me, she gave a disclaimer about the relationship between her employer and EA, I'd be defending her right now.

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

It's not just hating Andrea. Please read the last few pages of this thread. This is nothing like the negatively towards Brian.

Is there any sort of truth around "unbiased" opinions? I think the goal is to have insightful opinions. You may not be able to fully trust Garnett's recommendation on PS All-Stars, but he may have insight that's useful in you learning about the game (especially considering!).

Similarly, dev house folks may not be the folks you want to have on for hard hitting criticism - but a lot of times we bring insight from having worked on games.

Yes. I could never express it before but this is what I want.
Honest and insightful opinions. I do not care about biases. I am fully aware that Garnett, as a human being, can not help but have bias for PS All Stars. I don't care. Like I said before, I want to hear what Garnett has to say because it'll create insightful discussion.

I don't care that James Stevenson is an Insomniac guy. He, as a human being, can't help but have bias for his company's stuff. I don't care. He contributes insightful opinions.

Andrea contributes... PR. Which can be fine. She can spend all her time trying to sell me a game... if she really truly honestly feels that way about it. And if she really truly honestly feels that way about it, explain to me in an insightful way why.


EDIT: I just realized that last quote is Mr. Stevenson himself. I feel embarrassed for not noticing.

EDIT2: Eh... Maybe I give up. Some people are intent on brushing it off with "it's just video games and fun and entertainment" - like wanting a higher standard is a bad thing. I guess on Friday I'll see what Garnett thinks of the whole thing. I don't want him to hurt any of his friendships, but I did expect a higher standard because it is Garnett - a trusted name to me.
Ideally, all this is a huge misunderstanding and Andrea can stay but does a better job at explaining her opinions on the show going forward. It does bother me that she just laughs it off and considers the criticisms simply "NeoGAF trolling".
I'm not sure what anyone can say if she doesn't see how ridiculous her praise for Borderlands 2 is having only played up to level 12. If she truly thinks it's "trolling" to take issue with her incredibly high opinion of a game she has barely even played, then... well...

Maybe a better word than "honesty" here would be "transparency"? I don't know. English.

 

[Neuromancer]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

You're her demo though

 

[jstevenson]

logging off for the night to read and rest up for Halloween, but want to say I think this is a great discussion with some well-reasoned thoughts, especially for GAF. I hope they touch on it on the show this week.

i'll poke in tomorrow

 

[chickdigger802]

So um...

Who's a female games presser that is worth following?

I feel like most of them went off to do CM for games studios lol. Who's left?

 

[Nert]

So um...

Who's a female games presser that is worth following?

I feel like most of them went off to do CM for games studios lol. Who's left?

Kat Bailey is great on Active Time Babble. Jenn Frank has done a lot of insightful writing, but I'm not entirely sure as to where to consistently find her stuff (I think she's a freelancer at the moment).

 

[empathe]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

Jesus, leave me out of this one...

 

[RatskyWatsky]

Jesus, leave me out of this one...

You're Brian Lehy?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

You should tweet this to her maybe you can help her win a free T-shirt or some more EA money.

 

[Jake Tower]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice).

Nope. Spicer is great.

I am really glad this thread exists.

This kind of stuff exists in other business and media-related stuff too but just because it exists there doesn't mean gamers have to put up with it.

Hopefully this thread will actually change some people's reading habits and others' reporting habits.

In my experience it's tough sometimes as a writer on a blog/site/whatever b/c often times you're paid very little (paid per post or have a post requirement) and then there is a pre-approved list of "stories" or topics you can write about. Often times these "stories" are just links to PR releases or better yet, other sites' "articles" about that PR release. The writer doesn't really care about the story and has very little incentive to write something better than "passable" for that post. They do the bare minimum required to have that post "count" as a post and move on.

So from that perspective it might be easy to let the writer off the hook b/c they're "just doing their job" and the real "bad guys" are the people running the site and/or editors. But I don't think that is right. These "writers" need to stand up for better quality and integrity too, just like the readers need to demand better quality.

The problem, however, is that there are so many people that want to crack into this "business" that many writers feel/are easily replaced by someone that "plays ball." And because creating a site and getting a following isn't all that hard, the same can be said for websites. If one site stops playing ball, another will spring up to take its place.

This "business" needs to be changed from the top down, down up, inside out, and outside in if real lasting change is going to take place.

But like I said, this problem is not isolated to gaming sites. I used to live in San Diego and now San Diego's newspaper is basically just a mouthpiece for propaganda but it still is represented as "news." Here is a NY Times piece about that for those interested:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/b...bune-open-about-its-pro-business-motives.html

This post is already too long but screw it, right?

I was offerred a free trip across the country to cover a major video-game company presentation. I am not sure why representatives from this company contacted me and offered me the trip, etc, but it happened. They said they liked things I had posted about games and whatever before...so yeah...whatever.

I ACCEPTED THE TRIP. I was given no guidelines for what the company wanted from me or why they were sending me to this presentation. It wasn't like I was hired to cover the event by the company and sent there to write things for the company's site or told to tweet positive things, etc. Look, I'll be the first to admit, I'd be willing to do that but I'd make it VERY clear that is exactly what I was doing when I was doing those things. You would never see a tweet or something from me that was disguised as one thing when it was really another.

This trip, that wasn't the case. I wasn't hired by anyone to cover anything. I was told the company was familiar with past things I had done at similar events. They sent me there. The story goes...

I flew across the country, a car service picked me up from the airport, took me to the event, and I was provided food, etc. During the presentation at the event I started doing what I have always done at those types of events, tweeting my honest impressions and feelings along with some fashion updates on what people were wearing (b/c that cracks me up).

Then during the hands-on portion of the event I received a call from someone at PR saying essentially that they had read my tweets and then reminding me who paid for my trip. I was then told to meet a PR rep at the event where I would meet a company rep who would "work with me for the remainder of the event to make sure I was having the most enjoyable time possible and had all of my questions answered." I was babysat. I was so pissed about the whole experience.

I shot a bunch of video about the whole thing on my phone while there, as it was happening, my thoughts, etc. I decided not to really do anything with it b/c this business, like any business, is small and I didn't want to burn any bridges with "raw" "in the moment" emotions.

But the more I see stuff like this going on, the more I know we all need to stand up for everything we believe in, even if one of those things is just how games are covered, or whatever.

Dang. Sorry if this was long and didn't make sense.

 

[Anatoli Bacharach]

Here's a clip from 1UP Yours where Shawn Elliott busts Shane for literally following the Konami PR script following his special trip to Japan to play MGS4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zddwS815r1k&feature=youtu.be

Everyone should listen to this. I hope it got posted in the megathread as well. Why can't more people on gaming podcasts be like Shawn Elliott?

 

[CartridgeBlower]

Everyone should listen to this. I hope it got posted in the megathread as well. Why can't more people on gaming podcasts be like Shawn Elliott?

That was the great thing about 1up Yours. While every now and then Luke or Shane might get a little 'shilly,' someone would ALWAYS bust them on it. And that made it kind of okay.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Is there any sort of truth around "unbiased" opinions? I think the goal is to have insightful opinions. You may not be able to fully trust Garnett's recommendation on PS All-Stars, but he may have insight that's useful in you learning about the game (especially considering!).

Similarly, dev house folks may not be the folks you want to have on for hard hitting criticism - but a lot of times we bring insight from having worked on games.

I guess my point is, if you want a show that spends 2 hours discussing games from a completely analytical point of view w/ absolutely zero bias, well, I think it'd be hard to find a group for that. I think Garnett has done a good job bringing a good group together with varied opinions, interests, and opinions / thoughts on the industry. But as one of said people, I'm INCREDIBLY biased. ;-)



And final thing on Andrea, I can't speak well to Machinima's editorial policies. I mainly just wanted to shoot down the absurd AC t-shirt tweet. Obviously Machinima has a unique position in terms of being an official/unofficial licensee and making a lot of money off of Machinima created in certain developers' and publishers' IPs, while also sponsoring new/exclusive in-universe content. I have no idea how they structure all of that (and if it varies from pub to pub / IP to IP), but you all are probably right to ask those questions of Machinima, as long-term knowing how they treat all of that can only strengthen the relationship between the outlet and audience.

I really wish I never posted the tweet because it merely showed she has done what Florence was talking about in his article. The alleged payola stuff is much more serious:

http://m.neogaf.com/showpost.php?p=43764178

Bias is not a problem (at all) being paid to present bias is. Do we really want gaming podcasts to have every preview equivalent to asking a PR person "how awesome is your new game?"

"So awesome"

 

[not_so_special]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

i can see your shiny armour from here,fight the good fight champion

 

[Bedlam]

If you follow Machinima at all it becomes quite obvious what they're being told to pimp. That's why Andrea's (and anyone from Machina) opinion of Borderlands 2 pre-release was useless to me, made even more laughable when she was commenting on the game as a whole after admitting to only having played to level 12. That's why none of this garbage bothers me, because my opinion of the industry is rock bottom to begin with.

See, I don't follow Machinima, I don't even know what it is and what they do over there and thus assumed she was just another blind fangirl. Now that I know that she gets paid to pimp certain games, comments like "pre-order now!" make a little more sense. That stuff needs to be disclosed when she's on the podcast.

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

Happy 12th birthday!

 

[eznark]

Nope. Spicer is great.

I like that Spicer complains about opinions being represented as news and then links to David Carr.

 

[bigdaddygamebot]

Man, cant believe all the hate Andrea is getting. I wish Spicer got half this hate as he really sucks(or at least his baby voice). Regardless, maybe its because many of you are just smarter than me but almost never have a problem with Andrea and I really do not know why she more than any guest gets so much venom in this thread.

She reminds me of Brian in that he said what was on his mind and really did not try to sweeten up his personal opinion/view just because it went against the grain. And I think what got many angry with him like Andrea is that he did it in very basic way. Brian, if he hated a game like Fez, would most likely say something like...I hated Fez because I found the puzzles annoying and stupid. He did not add much filler in there or sweeten up why he disliked Fez for those that really liked Fez.

Oh well, I still really like Andrea and I hope she doesn't try to change for you bullies.

Bullies! Nice. With "entitled" , "witch hunt" , "tinfoil hats" being thrown around, "bullies" filled up my Internet Apathetic Bullshit Bingo Card.

She's nothing like Leahy because until given reason to do so...I know I can trust Leahy. Not always agree with him...but trust him.

Shane and Luke are nothing like Andrea.

One...they actually contributed.

Two...their bias was SO over the top that it was easy to see what role they were playing on the podcast.

Three...they're not shills. She is.

 

[bigdaddygamebot]

Is there any sort of truth around "unbiased" opinions? I think the goal is to have insightful opinions. You may not be able to fully trust Garnett's recommendation on PS All-Stars, but he may have insight that's useful in you learning about the game (especially considering!).

Similarly, dev house folks may not be the folks you want to have on for hard hitting criticism - but a lot of times we bring insight from having worked on games.

I don't think many (if any) have an issue with developers on the show. They are clearly identified as developers and everyone knows where that person is speaking from. Often, I am surprised with how open some developers are allowed to speak on podcasts.

This issue starts and ends with Andrea.

She tweets for the AC3 t-shirt. It's certainly not a PS3 but considering the Lauren Wainwright situation, I think you can see how what she did parallels what Wainwright did or is doing. This coupled with how she responded on last week's podcast, coupled with things she's done in the past such as giving the impression of reading off bullet points from a press release...none of it paints her in a good light. That's before the Need For Speed nonsense was revealed.

She seems to have the" vapid, pretty girl that's on the show because girls like games right?" position buttoned down. Fine. I can accept that. What it seems like now however is that she's not playing that role. She's a shill.

I guess my point is, if you want a show that spends 2 hours discussing games from a completely analytical point of view w/ absolutely zero bias, well, I think it'd be hard to find a group for that. I think Garnett has done a good job bringing a good group together with varied opinions, interests, and opinions / thoughts on the industry. But as one of said people, I'm INCREDIBLY biased. ;-)

Bias is encouraged. That's what makes listening to things like this so great. With bias however, we also need to trust the people on the podcast.

Currently...there's no reason to trust Andrea.

There's also no reason to trust Garnett to protect the integrity of his show at this point.

Bias isn't the issue. Trust is.

And final thing on Andrea, I can't speak well to Machinima's editorial policies. I mainly just wanted to shoot down the absurd AC t-shirt tweet. Obviously Machinima has a unique position in terms of being an official/unofficial licensee and making a lot of money off of Machinima created in certain developers' and publishers' IPs, while also sponsoring new/exclusive in-universe content. I have no idea how they structure all of that (and if it varies from pub to pub / IP to IP), but you all are probably right to ask those questions of Machinima, as long-term knowing how they treat all of that can only strengthen the relationship between the outlet and audience.

Timing is everything.

See...she's not even a good shill. A good shill doesn't get caught. A good shill would manage the perceptions of her audience more effectively. A good shill would realize that when someone in a similar position in the UK is being exposed for something they did...don't do something that appears remotely similar to that within the same week that it's all blowing up.

Laughing about it on twitter is a super-smart choice as well.

 

[Kiriku]

So um...

Who's a female games presser that is worth following?

I feel like most of them went off to do CM for games studios lol. Who's left?

Well, I think Nikole (Zivalich) has been pretty good on Weekend Confirmed so far.

 

[Brashnir]

Bias is encouraged. That's what makes listening to things like this so great. With bias however, we also need to trust the people on the podcast.

removed the rest of your rather long post, but I just wanted to expand on this one line.

It's literally impossible to find an unbiased person to put on a gaming podcast, unless you went out and got a person who had never played a game before. We all have preferences, issues, and habits we've developed over years of gaming that lend a bias to anything we say.

Bias is expected, but this isn't mere bias that we're worried about.