The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
We hear way more about what's going on in the movie industry than we do in the game industry
-
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.
Kotaku has been blacklisted by Bethesda Softworks and Ubisoft
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
We hear way more about what's going on in the movie industry than we do in the game industry
Clockwork5
Member
Rolling stone is pretty much a marketing dept of the music industry and always has been.
Yes publishers want to be in control of the release of information concerning their $100,000,000+ investment. Such assholes.
The game is the game. The product, the art, whatever is in the package.
The marketing is the promotion of the game. The hype trailers, the dev interviews, the pre-release coverage, the commercials, the press releases, the release schedule, etc.
The machine is the combination of the above two elements working in tandem with the people in the press, the marketing department, the PR department, the audience, and the relationship between all of them in making some people money and entertaining others. It's "engagement" and views and user youtube videos, advertising budgets, sequel possibilities, sequel budgets, sales numbers, developer staffing and layoffs, opinion pieces, backlash, etc. It's the industry.
It's the machine because parts of it that were never meant to be entertainment (layoffs, industry news, etc) have become entertainment adjunct of the product that is being sold (though it only exists because a product is being sold). It's the machine because the press works (presently) with the pubs to act as both an adversarial component as well as a marketing arm to get the word spread out. They make money off of the source material (the product) but not directly off of the product. But they know that if games didn't sell, they would make less money. They need games to be popular to make money. The pubs need (sort of) the press to get the word out wider, but don't like it when they spread the word negatively. The audience is also engineered to be both the consumer and a new product themselves. Evilore makes scads of money adjunctly off of games by hosting a place for people to talk about them. Kotaku gets money by lifting controversies and glitch videos that are made by audiences and presenting them on their site, so that the audience can then see themselves reflected back. The pubs like it when this happens because it increases the word and helps "engagement" to sell more of the product. But they don't like it when it reflects poorly on them.
Every piece of the machine tries to make money or get entertainment off of other pieces of the machine.
It's a machine.
I actually think the secrecy of a medium is dictated by how voracious the appetite for the material is.
People don't (or didn't, pre marvel) care that much about what studio was making what. People don't really care what the new Mattel toy line will feature. People don't really care about the new Penzoil synthetic.
People care A LOT about what Apple is making -> they are secretive
People care A LOT about the new Blizzard property -> they are secretive
I think there's a lot of reasons for the secrecy. I think most of it is because the audience can't handle it when things change. So companies don't want to show/push things that will change or be cancelled.
Just look at any thread about a cancelled game. It will no doubt be called MUCH MUCH better than whatever was released by the company.
Man, there's just so much wrong with this comic, first and foremost being that none of it reflects what actually happened in any of these cases. As if we criticized the Fallout 4 casting scripts or Assassin's Creed Victory marketing shots -- the ones we didn't get from the publishers in question, but from sources who hoped they would be shared.
Clockwork5
Member
Bullshit.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
It wasn't the sources call. You aren't wikileaks.
It's a really weak attempt at a political cartoon.
Does every major studio keep an opening line of communication with TMZ?
The movie industry is still so much larger than the video game industry. If there is an unofficial announcement or script leak, casting or behind the scene photos. A much larger percentage of the population would pay attention than something in the realm of video games.
Imagine if the entire script of Star Wars was released, or that there was going to be a live action Evangelion movie directed by Del Toro. The internet would break, compared to the plot of if a game like Persona 5 being leaked.
Here's something for starters; I can open a newspaper Monday morning and see exactly how every single movie performed in theaters the week before.
kavanf1
Member
You may be right there but the guy was asking if this was an endemic thing across industries so my response was with regard to that - these are exceptions in comparison to how the majority of businesses operate.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Well, it's apparently a major revelation that developers are working on precisely the games you expect they're working on before they were intended to be announced. Assassins Creed has a release every year, but leaking that information early is apparently damaging? It's been four years since Skyrim and 8 since the last Bethesda-developed Fallout. Smart money was that we were due for another Fallout, but apparently it's damaging to have that known too far in advance.
What's the biggest franchise in film right now? Probably Marvel stuff right? What's going there? Are we guessing as to whether or not there's going to be an Avengers 3? Nope. Here's the current roadmap:
Captain America: Civil War - May 6, 2016
Doctor Strange - November 4, 2016
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 - May 5, 2017
Untitled Spider-Man film - July 28, 2017
Thor: Ragnarok - November 3, 2017
Black Panther - February 16, 2018
Avengers: Infinity War Part 1 - May 4, 2018
Ant-Man and the Wasp - July 6, 2018
Captain Marvel - March 8, 2019
Avengers: Infinity War Part 2 - May 3, 2019
Inhumans - July 12, 2019
I think its less about specific plot details and more things like who is in a movie, how much they're getting paid, how many movies they've signed on for, when does filming start, when is the release date, etc etc...
That type of information is pretty much out there all the time. For games, even things like release dates are hyper controlled. A studio might know, but want to save the release date for a specific moment or something.
piratethingy
Self professed bad raider
Always blows my mind how people can come into discussions like this and instantly assume one company is a paragon of selflessness and exists solely for the betterment of the world, and the other only to cause pain and suffering.
Kotaku wants to make money. Game publishers want to make money. They both look silly here imo. Publishers being a bit overcontrolling, which is fine with your 100M$ investment or whatever, but probably not smart just because they have to know how the gaming public might perceive stuff like this.
Kotaku looks pretty whiney. No, you shouldn't be the marketing arm of this company. So why does this company owe you early access/comments etc?
Kotaku wants to make money. Game publishers want to make money. They both look silly here imo. Publishers being a bit overcontrolling, which is fine with your 100M$ investment or whatever, but probably not smart just because they have to know how the gaming public might perceive stuff like this.
Kotaku looks pretty whiney. No, you shouldn't be the marketing arm of this company. So why does this company owe you early access/comments etc?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You sure ask a lot of questions, seemingly ignorant to a lot of things, for someone with such an opinionated stances in this subject.
Oh for fuck's sake!
/thread
Because the audience has historically acted poorly to changes in these things.
They are acting in their own (perceived) best interests.
If all you want is marketing and press releases, there's way better outlets than Kotaku. But that's not journalism. It's PR and marketing. It's not what Kotaku's doing. And it's fine! You don't have to read Kotaku.
What Kotaku does is journalism. They look into stories and then they publish them. A leak is a story like any other, which they look into, then publish.
That this is baffling, or even undesirable to some is beyond my understanding, because that's what they're supposed to do. It's normal for an outlet, any outlet, to do this.
Publishers reacting to that through blacklisting is somewhat gross, in a "Do as we say, or else" kind of way, and it's certainly worth talking about. It's in fact, quite literally, a matter of ethics in games journalism.
radios shipping overview
Member
P-A's petty digs at sites they don't like (Motherboard and now this) are not a good look and make for some pretty awful comics.
I like Kotaku a lot more after reading this thread.
I like Kotaku a lot more after reading this thread.
Artists who frequently do work for Ubisoft(and in the past Bethesda) think Ubisoft acted a-ok
what a shock
edit: At least they probably weren't wearing AC wristblades when they drew that
It doesn't matter if it was obvious. Their job is to maximize the effectiveness of their announcement, and that takes a lot of work, which means a lot of money. A leak can make that money and effort go to waste and ruin their plans. If that happens, that money is gone and the only people making money out of it are the people who posted the leak for clicks. These projects cost tens of millions of dollars, sometimes 100+. In some cases it might not matter, but it's not up to you or kotaku to decide.
So much about "journalists doing their job", yet few seem to care about the publisher doing theirs. Ridiculous double standard.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Feel free to engage whenever you want. Lobbing weak insults isn't an answer/argument.
Maybe you should blame the piece of shit employee who leaked the info?
Maybe Kotaku should?
Steve Youngblood
Member
Yes. All that time and effort gone to waste.
Fallout 4 Ships 12 Million in one day, Generates $750 Million (Note: Skyrim was 7M)
radios shipping overview
Member
Wow, when did PA fully switch over to being shills? Must be related to all their PAX business relationships.
Yeah, but it's not Kotaku's job to "not leak confidential documents". It's not your job either. They fuck up, and then they try to make Kotaku pay, which is more than a little bit unfair.
What the fuck does anyone have to gain from defending the publishers in this? A child-like sense of wonder at discovering advertisments? There's so much more in games to enjoy than the goddamn previews of upcoming attractions.
Clearly they should open up the lines of communications with Kotuku. It's hurting them tremendously.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I don't think that was ever anyone's point.
Obviously their fault as well, but it takes two to tango.
Irrelevant. It's not up to you or kotaku to decide if it'll make any difference, and they've shown they're willing to risk hurting a publisher's business if that's what it takes to get clicks, so they have every reason to be blacklisted.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I mean...are we really going to argue that the information that was leaked about the new Assasin's Creed was actually capable of harming sales? A lot of people are taking this as a given, but I need more evidence then just "anything less than the company's internal PR plan results in suboptimal sales"
I doubt it was. Could they have sold 15mil with a tighter messaging campaign? I don't know. Nobody does. What relevance did those numbers have?
And Kotaku has every reason to report on the blacklist. Isn't it nice how it all comes full circle like that?
Seems like a little double-standard in this thread. Companies can do whatever the fuck they want as long as it's their cash at stake while reporting on news that's leaked by the companies own employees is a huge ethical problem that deserves some righteous indignation.
Assuming that both are true(as they are in many cases) i still see it as a clear matter to support the "journalist" side in this. Gaming companies pulling the strings on the press is something far worse than the tabloidy nature of some sites.
Assuming that both are true(as they are in many cases) i still see it as a clear matter to support the "journalist" side in this. Gaming companies pulling the strings on the press is something far worse than the tabloidy nature of some sites.
Enter the Dragon Punch
Banned
radios shipping overview
Member
That isn't journalism. It's a product announcement, like the emails about photoresistors and aluminum enclosures that Mouser spams me with.
Where are you getting astroturfing from? Sounded like an accusation of being okay with press that are overly chummy with sponsors.
michaeltraps
Member
I'm glad Kotaku opted to be clear with their readers and offer an explanation for the delay of the Fallout 4 review.
What I don't agree with is the tone of the blog post, with Kotaku acting as if they've been slighted by a friend. Using language like "good-faith assumption,"maybe theyd get over it," and even the title "A Price of Games Journalism," comes across as fishing for sympathy/playing the victim.
Kotaku can (and should) report on whatever the hell they want, but negative consequences will pop up from time to time. Any journalist would run the risk of messing up relationships when releasing secret information, and games journalism isn't exempt from that. There are both positives and negatives to getting the "hard-hitting" stories.
Do Bethesda and Ubisoft come across as petty? Sure. Do I blame them? Not really.
What I don't agree with is the tone of the blog post, with Kotaku acting as if they've been slighted by a friend. Using language like "good-faith assumption,"maybe theyd get over it," and even the title "A Price of Games Journalism," comes across as fishing for sympathy/playing the victim.
Kotaku can (and should) report on whatever the hell they want, but negative consequences will pop up from time to time. Any journalist would run the risk of messing up relationships when releasing secret information, and games journalism isn't exempt from that. There are both positives and negatives to getting the "hard-hitting" stories.
Do Bethesda and Ubisoft come across as petty? Sure. Do I blame them? Not really.
Enter the Dragon Punch
Banned
"posts like these make me wonder if the mods need to cull some astroturfing accounts again."
"astroturfing accounts"
There's a big difference between pulling the strings of the press and not taking their phone calls.
I think the people "defending" the Pubs are only saying there's nothing wrong with them not talking to Kotaku or any site, Joe Blow youtuber or whatever.
Yup
With little regard for ethics, perhaps.
I guess I read it as more indirect and referencing other posts in the thread as well, not "YOU ARE AN ASTROTURFER"
Steve Youngblood
Member
I think my main point here is that it's worth assessing whether or not any real damage is being done. I think there are two different points that are worth considering.
1.) Can a leak ever be damaging?
I don't have a "yes" example at the ready here, but I'm positive that there have been instances where stuff was leaked early and perhaps it wasn't in the right state for the reveal. I readily concede that this can be damaging. Perhaps the product is in a rough state and not ready for prime time yet. Perhaps there are half-finished ideas that may ultimately be dropped much to consumer disappointment or ripped due to an inability to get it to pan out right or ripped off by competitors and steal the novelty. Or insert any of a myriad of other possible examples here.
Honestly. I'm not saying that all leaks are great and that I demand a constant stream of scoops from my journos. I'm not saying that marketing is a sham that seeks to brainwash the gullible into buying their crappy products. I get that there's a science to it. However, as let's pivot to question 2.
2.) Should information about a game only be disseminated in a PR-approved fashion pre-release?
That question may seem disingenuous, but I sort of feel like where some people are landing is answering that question in the affirmative. And I just don't get it. I'm not saying there's no point to any secrecy ever, but you can not convince me that the only correct way for consumers to learn about a product prior to release is in precisely the fashion that the product's marketing team has planned out.
-----
I'm not encouraging journalists to hack computers or infiltrate dev teams to get us information by any means necessary. But I think part of what journalists are supposed to do is divulge information about games that their readers want to know about. And if that's a juicy tidbit about an in-development game, I don't think it behooves them to sit on it just because it goes against marketing's master plan. Honestly, unless it is something damaging in regards to the product, I would think that marketing should be prepared for this and to think on their feet. Is it really harmful that this information is out there?
Again, that's a rhetorical question. Perhaps it really is. I don't know. But I'm not going to concede that it's automatically bad for them just because they weren't the ones who released it according to their own plan. This info might very well feed into the very hype cycle that they're trying to create!
Imbarkus
As Sartre noted in his contemplation on Hell in No Exit, the true horror is other members.
But I don't see how refusing to respond to inquiries or provide review copies is pulling anyone's strings.
It is, in fact, the very hype at play that makes a review more profitable immediately after the embargo is lifted than it is, say, days later when a reviewer would be able to post a proper review of a street copy.
But that would be the price you would pay for running whatever you want--posting that later review and losing those clicks of Day One relevance. Then again, the price paid for running whatever you want--to the subject--can and has been very great suffering on the part of teams, companies, and individuals. That may not ever be of any real relevance or impact to Kotaku themselves at all, unless those affected people make it so.
And if all they are doing is failing to reply to inquires and provide review copies, then "blacklisting" refers to cutting off the free drip-feed of content boosters, really.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
Seriously what's up with consumers feeling the need to protect multi billion dollar companies?
Blacklisting Kotaku is fine, it's bad for them but also bad practice by a company.
Blacklisting a website that they can not ethically support I can get behind but blacklisting a website for for once doing actual journalism feels wrong.
Blacklisting Kotaku is fine, it's bad for them but also bad practice by a company.
Blacklisting a website that they can not ethically support I can get behind but blacklisting a website for for once doing actual journalism feels wrong.
Enter the Dragon Punch
Banned
Or, you know, I was answering the question of where I got astroturfer from...
Even if you didn't outright say brau was an astroturfer, you certainly implied it.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Citation? This is what I'm asking, when has this actually happened? Outside of poor review scores, but I believe you're talking about leaks specifically
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
Thank you! That gives me some clarity, and it's worded a lot better than I could hope to replicate. I'm sorry if I came off as rude at all.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I'm not trying to be aloof or disrespectful here, but I honestly have no idea who brau is.