geoff's my dawg but this is one of the funniest posts I've seen
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bioshock "Exclusive Review" IGN edition - A lot of annoyed journos (Ironcreed wow).
- Thread starter unbias
- Start date
I have enough godamn topics, someone make a topic out of this.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...in-self-smugness-over-riccitiello-resignation
"Kotaku reveling in what, due to their self-smugness, they don't realize is a sad day for our industry, which is the platform on which they actually make money. John not only helped propel our company and interactive entertainment into new experiences, thus enticing millions of new people to become 'gamers', his work leading the ESA in recent years has helped ensure that we don't experience the fate of the music industry," Moore said of his former boss. "Sad loss for all of us who had the pleasure of working with him as we emerged from The Burning Platform."
Someone is getting pretty salty. FFS this needs a topic.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...in-self-smugness-over-riccitiello-resignation
"Kotaku reveling in what, due to their self-smugness, they don't realize is a sad day for our industry, which is the platform on which they actually make money. John not only helped propel our company and interactive entertainment into new experiences, thus enticing millions of new people to become 'gamers', his work leading the ESA in recent years has helped ensure that we don't experience the fate of the music industry," Moore said of his former boss. "Sad loss for all of us who had the pleasure of working with him as we emerged from The Burning Platform."
Someone is getting pretty salty. FFS this needs a topic.
CamHostage
Member
They weren't. Magazines paid little better than websites, maybe the freelance was better (any pay is better than "free") but I don't think the Andy Eddies of the world lived any happier in the SNES or N64 or Wii eras. And even though there were times where ad revenue ran fat, competition and an immature market meant plenty of garbage ad space (flip to the back of pages of your old GameFans and laugh.) Reviewers don't do it much for the money...
...yeah, they do it for that. Times have changed, but even now many of these guys got into writing about games because they were blogging or running fansites for free before somebody hired them.
Oh guy, you seriously believe in the literal moneyhat? It's a myth, there's no real system of payola. (I'm not saying it's impossible that it's ever happened, but we're talking snipe-hunt, not fish-in-a-barrel.) Realistically, there's not even that clear a connection between Sales and Editorial (the only people I know who ever touched both an ad dollar and a typewriter were running fansites or smaller zines, in a pro site or magazine you have people bringing in the ads and you irregularly know about those deals until the ink is dry.) "Moneyhat" is A) just a joke and a meme, but B) a larger concept of the trail of cash between publishers and media outlets and the question of if that trail is crossed by those who should stay away from it.
If you believe in moneyhats, go write a review. Here's what you'll get paid: a flat fee. But what if my article goes viral? You get the same flat fee. But what if there's a big advertising campaign tied to that game? You get the same flat fee. Reviewers work on flat fees and salaries, they don't work on commission. They care about hits only because A) it helps them stay in the job or get another job if a work does well, a B) and C) and D) it strokes their ego's cock to get a huge readership on an article. Nobody's getting rich writing about game reviews. You know Greg Miller and Jeff Gerstmann and N'Gai Croal because you've seen their work, but don't confuse yourself that they're rich because they're famous.
Gamers have been conditioned to rarely ever take early reviews seriously, everyone knows that they are typically much higher than the reviews that come out later on
I expect sentences such as "ending this generation with a bang!", "swansong of current gen", "we started with a masterpiece in BioShock, we are ending it with a masterpiece with Infinite" and "BioShock deserves Infinite out of 10!" and other such hyperbolic statements that are more the works of a marketing department than some guy sitting down and reviewing a game.
Though i suppose it will work, i cannot wait for this review, but not for the reasons IGN thinks, i just wanna read it now
I expect sentences such as "ending this generation with a bang!", "swansong of current gen", "we started with a masterpiece in BioShock, we are ending it with a masterpiece with Infinite" and "BioShock deserves Infinite out of 10!" and other such hyperbolic statements that are more the works of a marketing department than some guy sitting down and reviewing a game.
Though i suppose it will work, i cannot wait for this review, but not for the reasons IGN thinks, i just wanna read it now
Pretty much.
Oooooh, EA vs. Kotaku. FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT! FIGHT!
Broder Salsa
Banned
I'm late but : Gies taking part in a discussion about integrity in game journalism?
Gully State
Member
Oscar worthy script....
IrishNinja
Member
alright, derrick...you did right by your tag that time
this wasn't bad either
la flama blanca
Banned
One day someone from the gaming industry or surrounding industry will write up a detailed article on how sick the world of gaming journalism is from witnessing specific events first hand. One day we'll get juicy details from future events like the Call of Duty review summits or the like...just carefully waiting.
Ninja Scooter
Member
Considering the same shit happens and has been happening for years in the music and movie industries I hope you don't hold your breath.
There's a Rebel FM somewhere in the first half of 2012 where Gies bitched about Polygon not being able to access Diablo 3 before release in order to get the review up in time. If I remember correctly, this was Blizzard's policy for everyone who reviewed the game, so he was essentially suggesting and subsequently bitching that he and all his cronies would be forced to play the game in the same manner as the rest of us undesirable plebeian scum.
It was one of my favorite moments in Gies-dom. Really showing his true colors there.
It was one of my favorite moments in Gies-dom. Really showing his true colors there.
excaliburps
Press - MP1st.com
This. Everyone is quick to point out corruption or bribery when it comes to reviews. But I've honestly yet to see it firsthand. I've been writing about games for a living for a few years now, too, and I've yet to be "commissioned" to do any such thing.
It's a standard flat fee (or word count) and that's it.
And also agree with the last statement. Games writers, reviewers, etc. are not rich...and I doubt they (we'll) ever be. It's just the nature of the job. Average pay (or below average) but you get to do what you love.
Not saying this whole exclusive thing is good, mind. I mean, even now, we can already tell IGN will be giving Infinite a least an 8.5...if not a 9 or 9.5 and proclaim it the Best Game of the Year so far.
I should be doing hw
Member
Plenty of films, documentaries and books have been made on that subject regarding those two industries though. Television as well.
akidnamededdy
Banned
One group of fake journalists gets exclusive first review to a game, another group of fake journalists publicly and unironically complains about perceived lack of integrity.
I should be doing hw
Member
I don't see anything wrong with this seeing as the point of a review, and his job as a reviewer, is supposed inform the consumer about a potential purchase. The relevance of this information lessens considerably once the product is out already. A similar thread runs at the core of this "controversy" right?
Ken's face says it all.
Raitosaito
Member
But then he would be in a position where his review may not reflect the purchase that the consumer made making the review moot, which makes the opinion even less relevant.
Trent Strong
Banned
That's not smart if you don't have an unlimited video game budget.
You're right, it does. Compare it to the picture posted during the AmA a while back and you can see that Ken's emotional state is that of indifference.
Look at those deep, woeful eyes.
doniewhalberg
Member
huh, came into the thread expecting something, but what is there to talk about here? It's IGN and then Keighley, Gies and Sessler as the counter points. Who could take anything these four say seriously? I mean, really. Well known site made up of failed hollywood extras and journos that are effectively just video content presenters get exclusive, people of similar backgrounds get angry they didn't get it? Business as usual.
It was pretty much the consensus in the Doritos thread that the issue wasn't really with Geoff as his usual self as the host of GTTV or the person writing "The final days of" series.
Can we stop ignoring that megathread that had very many good points made?
I laugh at all the jokes and images as well, but when someone makes a serious point that he has no integrity outside of the one event where he went on record to say how it's "good for gamers" that Mountain Dew and Halo partner you have lost me.
That doritos-meme has a live on its own and it's fine to make jokes about it but you can't try to squeeze it back to make some greater non-reasoned point.
Exclusive reviews are not fine, ever. The regular way is that the review will be over-scored compared to the average. Now in the case of this being a big issue in games media, the game will probably be under-scored as to show that "but but we have integrity and stuff" purely because there is now such a focus on the review from IGN for this game and every sentence will be turned around twice.
Can we stop ignoring that megathread that had very many good points made?
I laugh at all the jokes and images as well, but when someone makes a serious point that he has no integrity outside of the one event where he went on record to say how it's "good for gamers" that Mountain Dew and Halo partner you have lost me.
That doritos-meme has a live on its own and it's fine to make jokes about it but you can't try to squeeze it back to make some greater non-reasoned point.
Exclusive reviews are not fine, ever. The regular way is that the review will be over-scored compared to the average. Now in the case of this being a big issue in games media, the game will probably be under-scored as to show that "but but we have integrity and stuff" purely because there is now such a focus on the review from IGN for this game and every sentence will be turned around twice.
doniewhalberg
Member
Well, it's not that he doesn't have *integrity*, it's just that he's complaining about something the site he works for would take in a second. And he's really just a tv presenter. I mean that in a good way, he's a good one, he's good in front of a camera, much better than alot of people in the game industry. But he's not a reviewer, outside of reading a script real well, who cares what he's saying? Yes, it'd be nice if there weren't exclusive reviews. I don't need Geoff, or Arthur Gies to know this. Their POV isn't particularly valuable in the first place (nor is IGN's) so the whole thing is just a bit "sure". People may as well make jokes and have fun if there isn't really something to discuss here.
I just spat out drink everywhere seeing this!
Boom.
Haunted
Member
While those tweets read like people in a fucking glass house factory throwing rocks at each other (with the obvious caveat that at least half of them are salty someone else got the exclusive opportunity to suck the publisher's cock for some extra clicks this time around)
- they're all correct. Exclusive reviews are PR garbage and I can't think of one ever scoring low and being critical of the final game, regardless of quality.
Otherwise the outlet in question probably wouldn't have gotten it, d'oh.
edit: that's not to say IGN's 9+ review of Infinite will be incorrect or even be an outlier compared to the later reviews - that's not the point.
- they're all correct. Exclusive reviews are PR garbage and I can't think of one ever scoring low and being critical of the final game, regardless of quality.
Otherwise the outlet in question probably wouldn't have gotten it, d'oh.
edit: that's not to say IGN's 9+ review of Infinite will be incorrect or even be an outlier compared to the later reviews - that's not the point.
I should be doing hw
Member
You can only ever know that in retrospect though and it only becomes most relevant in unique circumstances like Diablo III and Sim City where the problem isn't so much the game as the surrounding service (forgive the generalisation). But that discussion then becomes a whole other different can of worms that the industry hasn't successfully dealt with yet.
I just don't think it is "entitled" of him to want be able to do what he does with practically every other game he reviews and to also want to do that in the most effective and tried way possible. I don't see any delusions of grandeur and expectation behind it, certainly.
Hits
People taking them seriously is hardly an issue when most people don't take reviewing of videogames that seriously.
Loss to credibility=minimal gain in ad money= high
Haunted
Member
Less distinctive gamers than the people on GAF will flock to the first review.
You will get substantially (and I mean substantially) more hits on your site if you're the only review up on the net, even if it's only for a limited time. Exclusive reviews and reveals are very much sought after among gaming sites, keeping up a facade of credibility doesn't really factor into that.
fizzelopeguss
Banned
The shills are upset that someone out-shilled them, ohh dear, how will we ever survive.
Black Republican
Member
release the hou...reviews!
hahaha
Canis lupus
Member
Pretty much this.
I should be doing hw
Member
I still don't see the issue here. Geoff is allowed to state his opinion even though he is no reviewer. And he is correct in bascially saying that exclusive news coverage is fine, exclusive reviews, however, are not. There is a huge difference that some people are either unable to see or just unwilling to see so they can continue fooling themselves into thinking that posting idiotic and pointless doritos photoshops serves some kind of cause. Hint: it does not. It distracts from the actual issues.
Yeah, I guess I shouldn't be.
One thing I am very curious about is why is the review copy the 360 version? If you're gonna be giving out a copy for an exclusive first review shouldn't you go with the best possible version of the game, i.e. the PC? Also wasn't the lead platform PS3, which would make reviewing the 360 version all the more odd.
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
Why does it say Ironcreed wow in the title?
EDIT: just saw an answer... nevermind.
EDIT: just saw an answer... nevermind.
I think he was trying to go for a pun on the word website. But...fail.
Similar threads
- Locked