Oyashrio-Sama
Member
You have my Axe ($15) Pete!
-
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.
Pete Dodd (aka famousmortimer) is running an Indigogo campaign for a new website
- Thread starter ElTorro
- Start date
- Status
I gave Activisions TWD game a 3.2 and CoD: Ghosts a 6.6. I did give Black Ops 2 a 8.5 the year before though. But only because I really liked that Call of Duty game.
It's all about how you explain that score. Don't just be an edgy try-hard dude who gives every Assassin's Creed game a 4/10 because "they're 2 casual lel".
Believe it or not, but publishers/developers actually read your reviews. If you give a game with a 85% metacritic a 60... they can't actually do anything if you give them valid reasons in your review. And I'm not talking about you saying you didn't like something in the review and them going "but that's impossible!" but more like listing things that are factually wrong in your review. They might comment on that, but they're mostly interested why you gave a lesser score etc.
You can even begin to think about a back end solution on that range, Unless he plan to sell the site as a glorified blogger/tumblr template.
Pete:
Polygon was supposed to be a paradigm shift too. If I could offer any advice it would be to avoid staffing your website with a group of people who lack diversity. Your writers shouldn't all be 30-something white males without kids living in a big expensive city with fiber internet who don't bat an eye at $60.00 for a new game.
That being said: With a couple exceptions, the current games websites aren't bad. They're just not relevant. Any information to be known for a pre-release game can be gotten directly from the developers themselves now. The games press is not going to know any more than a publisher/developer is willing to tell them. Publishers and developers will continue to get better at communicating directly with their customers. The traditional games press is too insular to curate properly, they rarely give insightful context and they only really serve as a platform for distribution. With so many more efficient distribution platforms like youtube, twitter, official blogs, and main stream press, it is only a matter of time before "traditional" game sites all close down and the valuable personalities within find more efficient venues for financial success (games PR, development, consulting, personal youtube/business/website).
If you agree with the preceding points, I think you have a shot at making something really valuable to people. I look to Eurogamer's Digital Foundry and Gamasutra's business analysis as great examples of providing valuable and unique coverage. I think you've been around long enough and consistent enough to be considered trustworthy. I am strongly considering chipping in and I wish you the best.
Polygon was supposed to be a paradigm shift too. If I could offer any advice it would be to avoid staffing your website with a group of people who lack diversity. Your writers shouldn't all be 30-something white males without kids living in a big expensive city with fiber internet who don't bat an eye at $60.00 for a new game.
That being said: With a couple exceptions, the current games websites aren't bad. They're just not relevant. Any information to be known for a pre-release game can be gotten directly from the developers themselves now. The games press is not going to know any more than a publisher/developer is willing to tell them. Publishers and developers will continue to get better at communicating directly with their customers. The traditional games press is too insular to curate properly, they rarely give insightful context and they only really serve as a platform for distribution. With so many more efficient distribution platforms like youtube, twitter, official blogs, and main stream press, it is only a matter of time before "traditional" game sites all close down and the valuable personalities within find more efficient venues for financial success (games PR, development, consulting, personal youtube/business/website).
If you agree with the preceding points, I think you have a shot at making something really valuable to people. I look to Eurogamer's Digital Foundry and Gamasutra's business analysis as great examples of providing valuable and unique coverage. I think you've been around long enough and consistent enough to be considered trustworthy. I am strongly considering chipping in and I wish you the best.
What makes something a fact as opposed to a rumor for you? Why does Amy Hennig being forced out, which IGN said they heard from numerous sources, count as a rumor, while Amy Hennig no longer working at Naughty Dog, which IGN also said they heard from numerous sources, count as a fact? Why is it more irresponsible to release an article where you say that multiple sources claim that Amy Hennig was forced out than it is to release an article where you state that Amy Hennig no longer working at Naughty Dog is a fact? I feel it will not be a very simple task to neatly divide articles into the three different categories you wish to have, and there will probably be times when you release an article that has statements divided between those categories that many people will disagree with, just as many people disagree with how IGN reported on that story. There might even be times when something you publish has a statement under the fact category that turns out to be false.
Yoda
Member
I agree one game will most likely never sink the ship unless its something insanely huge like Call of Duty. But that is just the problem look at Battlefield 4, that game shouldn't have gotten the scores it did, yet it got them from literally everyone in the games journalism buisness. http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/battlefield-4 An 86 for a game which will randomly delete saves, has somehow made its netcode worse than 3, etc... got stellar reviews? Why? I think the logic I outlined is the most likely culprit. Games journalism/Game development in general doesn't reward that well financially so I agree with the sentiment that most of the people who run these sites aren't corrupt in nature, but you can't dismiss the fact they are businesses and most of the core gaming audience views their opinions with far more cynicism than they use too.
Battlefield 4 had a review event like SimCity (it was in Stockholm, Sweden IIRC).
It was, but for the wrong reasons. It's done well to prop up MS questionable business plans and poke the fanboy fires, while providing cover and misleading stories. Editorially, they're all over the map (Do tiny differences in performance matter? One day yes, another day resolution and frame-rates are overrated!).
Taking a quarter of a million dollars from MS is all you really need to know. You don't do that if you're looking to be independent.
Yoda
Member
They are pretty damn disgusting then it comes to creating pure click-bait articles; if the idea of a console war didn't exist they'd lost quite a bit of traffic.
statham
Member
I like Fort, hes probably one of the more level headed insiders we have ( all insiders here are sony based beside ntkrnl), but he is a sony fan and doesn't hide it. I will visit his site but the people he hires or articles he posts will come from a sony fan angle. As a xbox fan I can't throw money to this.
CouldBeWorse
Member
Best of luck, but I'm not sure what $8k really does for you, Mort? It's definitely not enough to live on so is it just for the site design, bandwidth, and to buy games?
Also, as you increase your profile, it will be less likely that people tell you things unless they want the message to get out. Or you will feel more of an obligation to keep things to yourself. Either way, it's less fun for NeoGAF.
Best of luck, though. There should be a niche for this.
Also, as you increase your profile, it will be less likely that people tell you things unless they want the message to get out. Or you will feel more of an obligation to keep things to yourself. Either way, it's less fun for NeoGAF.
Best of luck, though. There should be a niche for this.
These questions are irrelevant to customers. I hope you get that. Gamers don't care about Ubisoft's review copy policies -- they care about how they spend their time and money. After a game's release day, anyone can watch or read about it on a bazillion different sources. Nobody needs another. There is no hole you're filling here. It's a waste of your resources, your audience, and the money that people are giving you. Use that to do something better.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
I like the idea of a gaming site for the people, so what the hell, I'll throw you a few clams.
LookAtMeGo
Member
Good luck mort!
titusandronicus
Member
The site design should be like the Drudge Report.
Good luck! Will chip in soon too hopefully.
Bit random but what I would also really appreciate is if game journalists would write in less annoying ways (like, not focussing on artsy descriptions instead of clarity).
And getting (smart) people who enjoy the genre to review those games.
Bit random but what I would also really appreciate is if game journalists would write in less annoying ways (like, not focussing on artsy descriptions instead of clarity).
And getting (smart) people who enjoy the genre to review those games.
I haven't read the most recent page because I still have real life stuff I need to do but that's probably besides the point I want to make. When I see something like this,
Pete, what are you getting for giving these other sites clicks? Now the rest of it, the monetization, success, I'll cover that later. Right now, for this post, the only thing that matters is that simply the name "Pete Dodd" gets clicks. And he'd be a fool to not somehow turn that into money.
It makes me look at Pete and think ; So someone else is getting money/clicks/something, for something you said on NeoGAF? Then there's this gem of an article.
What the hell is this? It's just Pete's name on an article and an opinion. Are you serious? When I see this, all I can say is...
Pete, what are you getting for giving these other sites clicks? Now the rest of it, the monetization, success, I'll cover that later. Right now, for this post, the only thing that matters is that simply the name "Pete Dodd" gets clicks. And he'd be a fool to not somehow turn that into money.
As I've posted before on GAF, something like http://www.theaudiocritic.com/plog/
This magazine was the same type of thing for audio/hometheater. They tried to do the same things for audio/hometheater that Pete is trying to do. They weren't succesful for a few reasons, one of them being advertising, for the very reasons you'd suspect.(forgot yo put this in) But damn was this a great fucking magazine when it did show up in the mail. Closest thing gaming had was Next-Generation magazine,I think.
They had a power cube which was used as a reference to measure the qualities of amplifiers. If you didn't do well with the cube, it was really hard for them to recommend your amplifier. This wasn't the only way they evaluated amps of course. The power cube was a great reference point for measuring the quality differences from different manufacturers.
They did double blind listening tests at matched levels to determine quality of sound for different audio electronics.
Gaming, imo needs reference points for technical comparisons. Things like FPS, frame pacing,(new to me) but should have been logical. A working definition of all resolutions (what is and isn't 720p on up the scale,..... etc). Texure comparisons. Basically, videogame craftsmanship reference points for the audience that does care. Establishment of these would be difficult I'm sure. Determing what's important and what isn't is different for everyone as we have seen on GAF. Maybe craftsman ship could be a subcategory for reviewing games. It would in no way be the most determining factor on recommendation of any game or not. Only part of a whole.
Along withall the other fun shit gaming has to offer.
I hope he succeeds where The Audio Critic failed.
This magazine was the same type of thing for audio/hometheater. They tried to do the same things for audio/hometheater that Pete is trying to do. They weren't succesful for a few reasons, one of them being advertising, for the very reasons you'd suspect.(forgot yo put this in) But damn was this a great fucking magazine when it did show up in the mail. Closest thing gaming had was Next-Generation magazine,I think.
They had a power cube which was used as a reference to measure the qualities of amplifiers. If you didn't do well with the cube, it was really hard for them to recommend your amplifier. This wasn't the only way they evaluated amps of course. The power cube was a great reference point for measuring the quality differences from different manufacturers.
They did double blind listening tests at matched levels to determine quality of sound for different audio electronics.
Gaming, imo needs reference points for technical comparisons. Things like FPS, frame pacing,(new to me) but should have been logical. A working definition of all resolutions (what is and isn't 720p on up the scale,..... etc). Texure comparisons. Basically, videogame craftsmanship reference points for the audience that does care. Establishment of these would be difficult I'm sure. Determing what's important and what isn't is different for everyone as we have seen on GAF. Maybe craftsman ship could be a subcategory for reviewing games. It would in no way be the most determining factor on recommendation of any game or not. Only part of a whole.
Along withall the other fun shit gaming has to offer.
I hope he succeeds where The Audio Critic failed.
SirUltimos
Member
I've worked in gaming journalism for a few years so I feel like I may have something to contribute here.
First off, listen to Jason. Everything he's said has been solid advice and will make your life a whole lot better once everything gets up and going. Especially about the niche - you need to find one and take it for all it's worth. Don't spread yourself too thin.
I'd like to touch on your news and reviews, especially. Leaks should be your primary focus because that's something unique your site can do that no one else can. You'll be much less successful in standard, run of the mill news. My site tried that for a bit and we ran into the problem that nobody cares. Readers are already checking IGN, Gamespot, etc. for news so they have reason to get it from you. You say that it will be worth it if it attracts even one reader, but trust me, it's really not. Once you find yourself working hours everyday to find and write the news and have essentially nobody read it your tune will change very quickly. It's essentially wasted time that would be better spent elsewhere.
As for reviews, keep in mind that if your reviews come out a week late no one will care. I've had to put up reviews late in the past and I may as well not have bothered. Absolutely nobody will read them. Once again your time will be better spent elsewhere. Also, never once have I ever gotten in trouble for a low review score. That's largely a myth and I've never seen anyone in the industry actually get in trouble for it. The only problems that arises are that fans of a particular game will rip you to shreds if you give "their" game a low score, but nothing from publishers. The story of the corrupt media outlets is largely a fabrication from what I've seen.
With that said, I wish you luck. I've seen your posts and you're a great dude so I really hope this works out for you. Feel free to PM if I can help in any way. I've been in this business long enough to feel like I've gotten pretty good at it.
First off, listen to Jason. Everything he's said has been solid advice and will make your life a whole lot better once everything gets up and going. Especially about the niche - you need to find one and take it for all it's worth. Don't spread yourself too thin.
I'd like to touch on your news and reviews, especially. Leaks should be your primary focus because that's something unique your site can do that no one else can. You'll be much less successful in standard, run of the mill news. My site tried that for a bit and we ran into the problem that nobody cares. Readers are already checking IGN, Gamespot, etc. for news so they have reason to get it from you. You say that it will be worth it if it attracts even one reader, but trust me, it's really not. Once you find yourself working hours everyday to find and write the news and have essentially nobody read it your tune will change very quickly. It's essentially wasted time that would be better spent elsewhere.
As for reviews, keep in mind that if your reviews come out a week late no one will care. I've had to put up reviews late in the past and I may as well not have bothered. Absolutely nobody will read them. Once again your time will be better spent elsewhere. Also, never once have I ever gotten in trouble for a low review score. That's largely a myth and I've never seen anyone in the industry actually get in trouble for it. The only problems that arises are that fans of a particular game will rip you to shreds if you give "their" game a low score, but nothing from publishers. The story of the corrupt media outlets is largely a fabrication from what I've seen.
With that said, I wish you luck. I've seen your posts and you're a great dude so I really hope this works out for you. Feel free to PM if I can help in any way. I've been in this business long enough to feel like I've gotten pretty good at it.
Honestly this pitch kinda reads like 'I'm gonna make a WordPress blog and see if I can get $8k for it.'
And I don't mean to imply that we're being scammed in any way, but there's no unique ideas or vision here. Not even the most basic things seem to be thought out. Branding is up in the air, there's no business model, planning to do news but then maybe cutting it in a couple months, etc. No offense famousmortimer, but it doesn't seem like you have any idea what you're doing here.
If you really have all these contributors willing to write free articles/news/reviews and someone willing to design your site for free, why not just launch it as a hobby first and then figure out a monetization plan before you try and make a living off this?
And I don't mean to imply that we're being scammed in any way, but there's no unique ideas or vision here. Not even the most basic things seem to be thought out. Branding is up in the air, there's no business model, planning to do news but then maybe cutting it in a couple months, etc. No offense famousmortimer, but it doesn't seem like you have any idea what you're doing here.
If you really have all these contributors willing to write free articles/news/reviews and someone willing to design your site for free, why not just launch it as a hobby first and then figure out a monetization plan before you try and make a living off this?
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Already unemployed.
Seems he's only risking his volunteer's and his time. Oh and other people's money.
I'm not going to lie, even if I had the money to support this (and I don't), I probably wouldn't because I'm not sure I care about the content being well-funded or well presented. Honestly, reading his posts, wherever they are, is enough for me, so I'm not sure I care enough about a project that requires initial funding. I fully support and get the idea that he should be paid for what he's doing, because I truly do believe the content he provides has great value... but the only thing I'm willing to invest in this is my time and my willingness to be exposed to ads. The content he provides is fantastic, I enjoy reading his opinions and I find him to be one of the most (if not the most) reliable industry insider we have on here. I've been lurking this forum for a long time now and I've always enjoyed reading his insight and the various insider tidbits he dares to share on here. So count me in as a regular visitor once the project is on the rails, but I don't know if I want to support the idea of the initial funding because, to me, form doesn't matter as much as the content. Current Pete Dodd is great. Transfer these same posts he makes on here onto another site and I will visit that site.
But I agree with everything everyone said about unique content vs. content anyone else can provide. Stuff like the Titanfall post provide great value for my time. It was interesting as hell. Mixing opinions with insider information in blog form, going over the recent "controversial" topics with that same industry insight and willingness to share your own controversial or simply well-informed opinion is something you should go for.
But I agree with everything everyone said about unique content vs. content anyone else can provide. Stuff like the Titanfall post provide great value for my time. It was interesting as hell. Mixing opinions with insider information in blog form, going over the recent "controversial" topics with that same industry insight and willingness to share your own controversial or simply well-informed opinion is something you should go for.
rob305
Member
Haha
I feel like a fairly large part of NeoGAF believes in quite a few of these gaming journalism myths. Now, there might be a few rotten apples in this industry that make the rest look bad but I've read some pretty delusional things regarding the "luxury" you apparently get.
Just a few months ago, I had to go to Paris to attend a Dark Souls II preview event. Namco covered traveling expenses for the Brussels -> Paris train but the rest was on me. I think it was around 200 so some people might think this is a free trip to Paris. Truth is, I have to wake up way early to catch my train, quickly buy some food/drinks at the station and then sit in a train for an hour till I reach Brussels because it's not like I live there. Once I'm there, it's another two hours or so till I reach Paris.
When I'm there, you have to cross the city and find your way to the event. It's kinda chaotic because I'm not used to Paris. When you're there, you get a presentation and play the game. But once it's over, you have to cross the entire city again real fast because the train ticket you have is on a fixed time and you have to make sure to not miss it. It's not like you have time left to check out Paris, visit the Eifel tower and stuff. For me, it's six hours (total, to Paris and back home) in a train, around 45min. crossing the city to the event and then you sit there playing the game with your headphones on. I barely have time to realise I'm in a different country.
It's a real hassle if you have multiple games like this in one week, so I really don't mind if my chief editor is like "you don't need to go anywhere next month". But I've seen people on here claim events like this are a real treat and people get influenced by them to give games better review scores etc. If anything, I'd rather have them send me the physical copy so I can relax and play it at home instead of all the stress I sometimes get with these events.
Derpcrawler
Member
Good way to strip fools out of their money. I mean seriously, FM and unbiased? Ha. On top of that his business plan is non-existent, and this project seem to be unsustainable. Pay for his rent and bills? I somehow don't think that maintaining small news/reviews blog would require so much time. Hell, there are isn't enough games comming out to throw out even 1 review per week.
There are hundreds of reviewers/YouTube personas out there who make decent living out of YouTube/Reviews but at the same time have job.
To me it seems just like another blog/idea that wasn't thought through and was thrown out in spite of the moment.
Sorry if I sound harsh, but this idea seem as reasonable as funding MisterX Media review/news site.
There are hundreds of reviewers/YouTube personas out there who make decent living out of YouTube/Reviews but at the same time have job.
To me it seems just like another blog/idea that wasn't thought through and was thrown out in spite of the moment.
Sorry if I sound harsh, but this idea seem as reasonable as funding MisterX Media review/news site.
It appears to me there is a disconnection between neogaf and the general gaming audience.
We people here care to much, probably more than we should about videogames, so we start to worry about stuff most people don't even have the time to think about.
Being a 33 years old working on regular ass enterprise dev, ya know most of my friends are worried about peasant issues like their mortgage or their lack of health care, Big publishers review policies are usually not an issue they want to worry about.
They still come to videogames to get a couple of hours of good old videogame fun, they yawn when presented with videogames publisher/dev politics.
SirUltimos
Member
I actually kind of wish a publisher would try to bribe me. The amount my career would advance from reporting that would be far greater than whatever they could give me.
Unless they wanted to buy me a private island. I would totally give their game a 10/10 if they bought me a private island
bitesnintendog
Member
I know I'm not an authority on the subject but I would like to second all the people telling you to avoid news unless it is with in the niche of your site. I sorta half assed a blog for like a month and while the audience I had only ended up being like 1000 people, almost all of that came from the few original things I wrote. I think the highest amount of hits I got for a news story was like 20 or 30. News will likely only be worthwhile if your site gets big.
Glass Shark
Banned
First of all, let me say that when I first read this thread and looked at the Indiegogo project, I was pretty skeptical. I would have thrown in with Jason and others who have basically said this is a waste of time, it's nothing more than Wordpress blog, you're not doing anything new or special, etc. etc.
And while I still don't fully agree with all of Pete's premise for why he's doing this, I think there is some real value here. For better or worse, it's clear that a lot of gamers no longer trust the big sites and publications like IGN, GameSpot, even Kotaku. We could argue all day long (and we certainly have) about the reasons for this and whether they're valid, but the simple fact remains that trust has been lost.
On top of this, it's clear that gamers want more and different information than what the mainstream games press is providing them. They want more about resolution. They want more about frame rate. They want to know the inner workings of the industry in ways that just don't get adequately covered right now.
(Jason, you made a comment saying that gamers don't want to know the review policies of big publishers... I think that's an overgeneralization. People are passionate about games and everything that surrounds them. They are aching to absorb as much information as possible about them. I think it's doing a disservice to your audience to assume people don't want to know about that stuff.)
If Pete can be a champion for gamers and provide this type of information and insight that they can't get elsewhere, or if he can provide similar information in a way that more gamers trust him, then I think that's valuable. Even if reviews don't come out right away, some people will still find value in them. Don't assume that everyone buys games on day one. Some people don't have the time or money to do that. I can't count how many times I've seen comments on GAF along the lines of "I'll wait until it goes down in price."
So anyway... to Pete, I think if you're passionate about this project you should go for it. There are clearly people who believe in what you're doing. Keep on truckin'.
And while I still don't fully agree with all of Pete's premise for why he's doing this, I think there is some real value here. For better or worse, it's clear that a lot of gamers no longer trust the big sites and publications like IGN, GameSpot, even Kotaku. We could argue all day long (and we certainly have) about the reasons for this and whether they're valid, but the simple fact remains that trust has been lost.
On top of this, it's clear that gamers want more and different information than what the mainstream games press is providing them. They want more about resolution. They want more about frame rate. They want to know the inner workings of the industry in ways that just don't get adequately covered right now.
(Jason, you made a comment saying that gamers don't want to know the review policies of big publishers... I think that's an overgeneralization. People are passionate about games and everything that surrounds them. They are aching to absorb as much information as possible about them. I think it's doing a disservice to your audience to assume people don't want to know about that stuff.)
If Pete can be a champion for gamers and provide this type of information and insight that they can't get elsewhere, or if he can provide similar information in a way that more gamers trust him, then I think that's valuable. Even if reviews don't come out right away, some people will still find value in them. Don't assume that everyone buys games on day one. Some people don't have the time or money to do that. I can't count how many times I've seen comments on GAF along the lines of "I'll wait until it goes down in price."
So anyway... to Pete, I think if you're passionate about this project you should go for it. There are clearly people who believe in what you're doing. Keep on truckin'.
famousmortimer
Banned
Timdog will be our social media guy.
Also, Jason, I respectfully disagree. I think there are plenty of people who want to know how the industry works. Not Kotaku-like numbers of people, but enthusiasts that want to understand everything they can about the hobby they love so much. I don't feel like it's a waste of time looking into such things.
miDnIghtEr20C
Banned
Ha ha ha.. even my xbot ass knows about Tim Dog. Lol.. he's ranked "Executive Level 12 A." Don't confuse that with 12 B. Big difference. Mr. Gates will not like me talking about Timmy.
Mort, judging by your responses and the critical analysis of people in this thread I really think you should look at finding a business consultant, somebody who can work the financials and develop the website with you. You called yourself an ideas man, which means that you've got grand plans but you need someone to shape those ideas into something realistic as an actual business plan which you just don't have.
You've got experts in this thread giving you good advice and a stable of people willing to help you. I think you should take advantage and listen to people like Schreir and other seasoned journalists, carve out a niche before taking on the bigger stuff and work out a real, feasible direction. If you come back with that and ask people for money you might find them a lot more receptive.
EDIT: Also your staff, are you paying them? You can't rely on volunteers in the long term. What you can provide should be the bulk of the site to begin with, because if a writer is good they'll leave you sooner rather than later for something paid.
Is the indiegogo name less trustworthy than kickstarter?
If so is that cause of the keep all money if you do not reach the goal aspect?
bitesnintendog
Member
I don't think Indiegogo is less trustworthy but most people are uncomfortable giving money to a project that might not be feasible until a certain amount is met. Kickstarters often outline what the bulk of the money will go towards and gives a number it needs to meet to start work. On Indiegogo a project gets money even when the amount they raise is no where near what they need to get started.
In this case the promise is of a website that he already has someone making. All he needs is the money for hosting and living expenses to make it possible to work on the site. I think it is safe to assume a site will exist even if he misses funding.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
The pitch already states as much.
In fact, it's almost fatalistic, basically stating that he doesn't think he'll reach his goal.
Krusenstern
Banned
Do I smell fear?
Mort, I love the idea behind this and that you promise on doing transparent and investigative journalism. I'm going to pledge 15 bucks. Will be the number one site I'm going to frequent, right after GAF.
I'm pretty sure polygon was formed to do better than other sites before it, journalistically wise. People begin with idealism, lofty goals, and to make money. The ones left standing are those who make money. That's not to say polygon lost it's way. It's top notch reporting and great features. People have problem with their criticism which is just one aspect of journalism. Actually they just like to obsess over Arthur.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Their reviews have to be bog standard so that they can do the longer features, but I assume it's because their reviews drive most of the hits/revenue to the site.
So how are you planning to get publisher support for something like this? They don't have to blacklist you, they can just ignore you. It's not like you're going to be starting off as some major gaming website that attracts thousands of readers daily. Publishers will ignore you and you'll have to buy your own games to review, that in turn will lead to your reviews being published after everyone else. At which point very few people will even care. There's a reason why sites like IGN and Gametrailers bend over backwards to please publishers, it's what they have to do to survive.
Then there's the issue of reporting news. People who already get their gaming news off IGN, twitter, reddit, neogaf, what reason would they have to go to you? What's going to attract them? A website like this needs some sort of hook to draw people in and I don't think you've explained exactly what it is. Your leaks are about the only reason people will visit your website, but that stuff is usually posted on Gaf anyways so I'm not sure what's going to draw people in.
Then there's the issue of reporting news. People who already get their gaming news off IGN, twitter, reddit, neogaf, what reason would they have to go to you? What's going to attract them? A website like this needs some sort of hook to draw people in and I don't think you've explained exactly what it is. Your leaks are about the only reason people will visit your website, but that stuff is usually posted on Gaf anyways so I'm not sure what's going to draw people in.
Who says he needs publisher support ? I think that's why people are telling Pete to start small and to focus on something specific like customer advocacy, carve his own niche and advocating for the customer seems like a good one to me. Also, not everyone gives a fuck what IGN thinks about anything but I doubt reviews would be a main focus of the site anyway.
muleyman13
Member
Have you even read the whole thread? He has talked about the people who will help him. It is going to be a "games" site not a "Sony" site, I don't get this biased and slant argument on a guy who owns, plays, and wants all consoles to do well. Or do you only read sites with a "Xbox" slant and be happier if it was negative towards Sony? Seriously asking cause I would think just being a gamer people would want the truth about all the subjects covered.
Dr.Schlomo
Banned
To be fair, most of the other guys helping him out have a sony bias as well...that I can remember. I could be very wrong though.
How is he going to get viewers then? A few hundreds hits from Gaf faithfuls isn't going to be enough to sustain a gaming website.
Brad Grenz
Member
MS did a pretty good job over the last year making sure most of the world has a "sony bias".
- Status