Support NeoGAF

[Agent_Carnage]

I dont undersand how they dont have the time to make a one hour Quick look at the game. There really isnt much of AAA games coming out right now isnt like there is tons of games and they had to pick and choose.

Their loss is someone elses clicks I guess.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

Xaero Gravity for SW king! (I kid)

Secondly, this is disappointing from someone that stood for integrity after the Kane and Lynch review fiasco.

#Xaero4King2018

 

[DanielJr82]

Giant Bomb is irrelevant.

 

[Chairman Tickles]

I'm going to say, GB is free to cover whatever game they want to cover. But this omission in particular hurts both their credibility and their fanbase trust in them. No way around that. I find it hard to believe that of all the members on the team, not a single one feels inclined to play a very good oblivion-esque game, even at the recommendation of their own fans. What confirms the pettiness of their antics is of course Jeff's last sentence. It's *sigh* once again...politically motivated slacktivism on the part of gaming journalists directed at a piece of entertainment software. It is not healthy for the industry.

 

[MayauMiao]

I dont undersand how they dont have the time to make a one hour Quick look at the game. There really isnt much of AAA games coming out right now isnt like there is tons of games and they had to pick and choose.

Their loss is someone elses clicks I guess.

You know what is bizarre? GB 'The Dating Games' videos on their youtube channel getting lots of dislikes, yet GB willing to spend over 2 hours of Let's Play reading the dialogues of the characters.

 

[Dizagaox]

If somebody at GB wanted to cover the game, it would have been covered. It's not a news-led site, it's all editorial. Quite simply, nobody wanted to do the game. Why is that hard to grasp? It's nice the game has sold well, but doesn't excuse it from being bland as fuck.

 

[FrostuTheNinja]

Drying paint watches Giant Bomb.

 

[kanamechan]

People screaming politics the moment a private site doesn't post their current peeve game sure is silly. GB has no obligation to post anything.
In fact, that they don't do so shows their journalistic integrity. Sorry that they don't drop whatever they care for to support whatever politics you want them to. That's not what they exist for. They aren't Breitbart, theescapist, Kotaku, or whatever, and made a deliberate move *away* from that.

But then, I find people screeching about "evil journalists" to be inherently funny. Whatever debate you look at, whereever this screeching happens, the "evil journalists" usually look... entirely reasonable. Look at Cuphead, where *certain* gamers imagined something about evil journalists, and yet the game... ...reviewed well and was mainly liked by those "evil out of touch journalists". "Controversies" like this are manufactured. Always have been, always will be.

 

[Kadayi]

Personally, I never understood the appeal of Jeff and now he's just a soulless hack who probably hates his miserable life.

I think game-play has always been Jeffs principal thing. He's not really a story person at all, so most RPG stuff is largely lost on him. I do agree with the opinion that it feels like he's just going through the motions these days. though I'm not entirely sure what he could do beyond Giantbomb though. I don't think he's really cut out for consulting work like other older Game Journos/Critics have.

 

[Alx]

I'm not too familiar with GB, except for some funny videos of them testing weird stuff ("oh no, don't shake the baby"), but it seems fair that they get to choose what they're testing and what they don't. "Not interested" is a perfectly fine justification, we should let them have this coverage freedom, just like we should give developers their creative freedom.
As a matter of fact I suppose they could not do so much coverage of weird stuff if they had to focus on all popular games too. And since those games will get all the attention of mainstream sites, there is no major need of an additional one talking about them.

 

[WaterAstro]

I'm not too familiar with GB, except for some funny videos of them testing weird stuff ("oh no, don't shake the baby"), but it seems fair that they get to choose what they're testing and what they don't. "Not interested" is a perfectly fine justification, we should let them have this coverage freedom, just like we should give developers their creative freedom.
As a matter of fact I suppose they could not do so much coverage of weird stuff if they had to focus on all popular games too. And since those games will get all the attention of mainstream sites, there is no major need of an additional one talking about them.

Except if the reason is actually political and "not interesting enough" is actually a lie...

 

[michaelius]

i wasnt suggesting that of the board, only of what i saw as an odd inclusion on the OPs part to snidely diss resetera. when a not insignificant amount of discussion by posters here and elsewhere is that resetera has become a liberal echochamber of leftist extremists what could saying someone has gone full resetera mean? OP cant answer me now

Well not giving platform was one of favourite tactics used by authoritarian left minority we had here before they migrated to era.

 

[Dunki]

You know what is bizarre? GB 'The Dating Games' videos on their youtube channel getting lots of dislikes, yet GB willing to spend over 2 hours of Let's Play reading the dialogues of the characters.

This is another part that is so bizzare. But I bet Abby has something to do with it. And I bet she also was not happy Vinny trying out kingdom come. At least that is what I am thinking after the GOTY podcasts

 

[Alx]

Except if the reason is actually political and "not interesting enough" is actually a lie...

Honestly I don't care if it's a lie or not. Just like I don't care if the design choices of a developer are based on good or bad beliefs (or no belief at all). I'm judging their work, what happens in their head is their own business.

 

[Kamina]

Doesn’t matter now does it? The game gets covered a lot, and they can do whatever they want.

 

[Dizagaox]

Except if the reason is actually political and "not interesting enough" is actually a lie...

Jeff would straight up say they're not supporting the game because of the developer's opinion. Instead he said it didn't help the case for the game.

There are games the staff pick themselves to cover and then games Jeff makes the staff play. Kingdom Come didn't qualify for either. The same way the last Pokemon games and Xenoblade Chronicles 2 didn't get covered.

 

[Dunki]

Jeff would straight up say they're not supporting the game because of the developer's opinion. Instead he said it didn't help the case for the game.

There are games the staff pick themselves to cover and then games Jeff makes the staff play. Kingdom Come didn't qualify for either. The same way the last Pokemon games and Xenoblade Chronicles 2 didn't get covered.

They love games like Elder Scrools series. The witcher etc. It is obviously something for either Brad, Jeff (not so much) but definetly for Vinny. But just like in the nier discussion I can't help but thinking abby has something to do with it.

 

[Dizagaox]

They love games like Elder Scrools series. The witcher etc. It is obviously something for either Brad, Jeff (not so much) but definetly for Vinny. But just like in the nier discussion I can't help but thinking abby has something to do with it.

But Abby doesn't wield that much power. I think she's a great addition but she's still very much a junior. Heck, I'm not a video game professional and I have more industry and gaming experience than her.

Abby did mention this week there are games people play that just don't get featured. Vinny is playing lots of Stellaris and that isn't prominent.

I feel if there was politics behind Kingdom Comes exclusion, Jeff wouldn't have answered it.

An example of politics behind a game's coverage is A Hat in Time. GB isn't the only one in that case either, where the combo of a dickhead developer, questionable guest voice acting, and one of the game's early reviewers being "unaware" it's actually publishing the game it's reviewing, all marred that game's coverage.

 

[Big4reel]

It`s a better answer than some other responses. I think one site said Kingdom come is racist and it doesn`T deserve to succeed and people who buy it are contributing to racism and anti progressivism

 

[Ploid 3.0]

When looking at a review the thing that killed my interest is how long it takes to start, and the empty world outside of towns (hardly anything roaming in the wild). It made me want to reinstall Oblivion to play a stealing rogue though. It would take a while to mod, could be worth it.

 

[Cato]

i wasnt suggesting that of the board, only of what i saw as an odd inclusion on the OPs part to snidely diss resetera. when a not insignificant amount of discussion by posters here and elsewhere is that resetera has become a liberal echochamber of leftist extremists what could saying someone has gone full resetera mean? OP cant answer me now

Resetera is not liberal. Nor are the people in that echo chamber liberals.
The militant and vocal ones are extreme left ideologues. Lets call them alt-left.

Just like the alt-right, the alt-left is a small but vocal caricature of the movement they come from. Just like the alt-right, the alt-left mainly consists of completely crazy identity politics zealots that are so toxic that they can not interact with normal people in any meaningful way.


Please, refering to the alt-left as liberals is just as bad an wrong as referring to the alt-right as being conservatives.

 

[brap]

Looking at their past Quick Looks, it does seem like there's more than just a lack of interest in the game. There is some total crap they've looked at; games they had to know was crap and still looked at them. Especially knowing the taste from some of the duders, like Vinny.

Compile that with other things on the podcast and GotY stuff in recent years and you could make a case that Jeff isn't being totally honest at the very least.

Yeah, it's weird. I rarely watch Quick Looks from them anymore because it's either some random indie game they found on steam in 3 seconds and have no idea what the price is or if it's out on multiple systems or games that I already have enough knowledge to form an opinion on ( I don't need to see a QL of Shadow of the Colossus HD, Okami, HD, SFV expansion pack, or Dynasty Warriors 9). They rarely cover anything interesting and now they're starting to look at visual novels/dating sims too.

 

[TwiztidElf]

What I will say is that journalism is about covering everything, even things you don't like. If they have a problem with Vavra, then report it. Dig deep and find out the truth.
I don't know if they have reviewed the game or not. If they did, that's good enough.

Tiny website with limited staff. They're supposed to cover everything?
Heh. I just looked at your post history. You're a sleeper mole left over that didn't account self destruct. Good for you!

 

[Scopa]

Tiny website with limited staff. They're supposed to cover everything?

What prompted this kind of rudeness? That is totally uncalled for.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Yall mad GB didn't review the game. Yall would be mad if GB reviewed and trashed the game.

Pick one. Or better yet, realize that you are part of the problem in video game journalism.

 

[Dunki]

Yall mad GB didn't review the game. Yall would be mad if GB reviewed and trashed the game.

Pick one. Or better yet, realize that you are part of the problem in video game journalism.

No one said ANYTHING about reviewing.

They did not even talk one bit about it. They did not show it on unprof friday, they did no quicklook eventhough they do quicklook on every popular game at least. They are trying to make it nonexisstent

 

[Inviusx]

I still watch and enjoy GB content but it's painfully obvious that this was a politcal decision.

Old GB would cover this game without a second thought.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

No one said ANYTHING about reviewing.

They did not even talk one bit about it. They did not show it on unprof friday, they did no quicklook eventhough they do quicklook on every popular game at least. They are trying to make it nonexisstent

This is precisely what I'm talking about.


If they want to pull a Fox News and not talk about the good things Obama has done, just dial to CNN or something and keep rolling.

 

[GamingEnthusiast]

Jeff Gerstmann is one of the most overrated video game critics of the 21st century.

 

[Dunki]

This is precisely what I'm talking about.


If they want to pull a Fox News and not talk about the good things Obama has done, just dial to CNN or something and keep rolling.

I do not want this because it would get more coverage I want that because I know its fits right in the alley for some people there and I loved their quicklooks back then. To me Giantbomb has change and if there is nothing really interesting anymore until June (when my sub ends) then I do not know If I personally want to support them anymore since they seem to have lost the fun in videogames.

It is for my personal enjoyment not the games receptions.

 

[Kadayi]

Yall mad GB didn't review the game. Yall would be mad if GB reviewed and trashed the game.

Hold up there, so the only options are that they don't review it, or they review it and it's apparently trash? That's some good ol binary ass backwards logic if ever I've heard it.

Or better yet, realize that you are part of the problem in video game journalism.

Care to elaborate on that statement? Because that again doesn't make a whole heap of sense either.

f

 

[Mr Wonderstuff]

Slaps of arrogance if you ask me. Ah well here's hoping Vinny has a shot at it as I think he would enjoy it.

 

[SolarFry]

I like Jeff and I don't care if he's not interested in covering a game. The dude's barely interested in games as it is.

But this is disappointing. Not even Vinny? Why.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Hold up there, so the only options are that they don't review it, or they review it and it's apparently trash? That's some good ol binary ass backwards logic if ever I've heard it.



Care to elaborate on that statement? Because that again doesn't make a whole heap of sense either.

f

GB has made it known that they are disinterested in providing coverage of a game that other outlets like

So then by raising the question, do you think that they would go from 0 interest to loving it like everyone else, or would they review the game with a bone to pick?

Because if you look beyond what you suggest is a binary, then the demand that GB review the game knowing that other outlets like the game is to force a (positive) review that just reinforces what everyone has already said. What's the point if that's all there is at stake, except to push a game because reasons?

 

[plushyp]

"The head guy’s shitty views certainly don’t help, but I doubt we’d have covered it either way."

This right here is why it wasn't covered. Jeff Derpsman, don't spout BS and cut to the chase with your real reason.

 

[Ridcully]

There are a lot of games they don't cover, and I don't think they'd be scared to outright cite the creator's politics if that was the main reason - their former colleagues over at WayPoint didn't make any bones about. If it gets too big to ignore, they might come around. They did with the Souls games - remember how dumb they were about Demon's Souls initially, where only Vinny was on board? Same thing could happen again.

 

[Shifty]

"The head guy’s shitty views certainly don’t help, but I doubt we’d have covered it either way."

This right here is why it wasn't covered. Jeff Derpsman, don't spout BS and cut to the chase with your real reason.

So do you have some hard evidence for that? Or are you simply happy to have something to get outraged about and thus willing to assume?

Because y'know, jumping to wild accusatory conclusions instead of taking people at their word is, in part, the reason that resetera exists.

 

[rbanke]

I don't even know what the dev did that pissed off so many people, the game is only on my radar because of people posting about how terrible people are for buying it, or how terrible they are for not covering it. Personally, I think the game looks pretty cool and I'll pick it up eventually. All that aside, I don't think Jeff would have a problem saying they're not covering something on the basis of it being controversial or they didn't like the dev or something. I mean, they covered Hatred which half of the gaming comunity wanted to bury and give no attention to. They spent the entire quicklook basically shitting on it, but they did cover it. This seems like they've just not paid it much attention and for whatever the reasons are already don't care for the dev so why would they cover it? Maybe they will look at it now that it's getting attention.

 

[strange headache]

Good, I hope more of the usual suspects in gaming journalism refuse to cover this game, ridiculing themselves while making the game even more popular. Other people will review the game for what it is in a reasonable manner, making the hysterical outrage warriors even more irrelevant.

 

[bigedole]

So do you have some hard evidence for that? Or are you simply happy to have something to get outraged about and thus willing to assume?

Because y'know, jumping to wild accusatory conclusions instead of taking people at their word is, in part, the reason that resetera exists.

You're probably aware of this but he's just quoting JG, no reason to jump on him for quoting what the dude said (Plus from the sound of his sentence it sounds like he probably agrees with you anyways,)

 

[Shifty]

You're probably aware of this but he's just quoting JG, no reason to jump on him for quoting what the dude said (Plus from the sound of his sentence it sounds like he probably agrees with you anyways,)

Not quite. He's quoting the guy, proceeding to engage in an ad hominem attack by resorting to name-calling, then casting doubt on the stated reason for lack of coverage without presenting any actual evidence to back it up.

My stance is essentially this:

All that aside, I don't think Jeff would have a problem saying they're not covering something on the basis of it being controversial or they didn't like the dev or something.

Precisely. Jeff is the most straight-shooting person on that staff. I see no reason to assume he's lying, and nobody in this thread has presented a compelling reason to the contrary.

 

[Kadayi]

GB has made it known that they are disinterested in providing coverage of a game that other outlets like

That is some grade A horseshit. They play plenty of games other sites cover. Who the fuck do you think you're kidding here save yourself with that suggestion.

Because if you look beyond what you suggest is a binary, then the demand that GB review the game knowing that other outlets like the game is to force a (positive) review that just reinforces what everyone has already said. What's the point if that's all there is at stake, except to push a game because reasons?

What kind of word garbage is this? I'd expect them to give it some coverage on the fact that one it's a top-selling title that a lot of people are presently playing and two it's doing something different in the RPG space both in terms of setting and mechanics. Those seem like good enough reasons to do so. I'm not necessarily expecting a full review, nor am I expecting them to necessarily like it regardless of what other outlets might think. I'd just be curious to see someone like Brad or Vinnie could do with it in a quick look.

 

[Gundam]

who gives a shit if they cover it or not? Small legacy media like them are irrelevant. Even IGN is more important than them.

 

[cooper59]

If somebody at GB wanted to cover the game, it would have been covered. It's not a news-led site, it's all editorial. Quite simply, nobody wanted to do the game. Why is that hard to grasp? It's nice the game has sold well, but doesn't excuse it from being bland as fuck.

evidently you haven't played it. nothing worse than a little kid deciding something without trying it.

 

[N3DS]

If they don't want to do a quick look or review article, that is totally normal because they don't QL/review every single game out there.

But neither west or east crew have ever mentioned the game at all, not in UPF, not in any section of the podcasts. Not even in news section. Because now there is not so much news in the industry, while this crowd-funded independent single player PRG with a unique setting selling TONS is VERY news worthy.

Not to mention Vinny, who said many times that ME2 is his GOAT and is the only crew member who finished The Witcher 3 and thoroughly enjoyed it, has never mentioned this game, at all.

That has to be collective intentional avoidance, not just lack of interest.

 

[base shagohod]

Politics aside, it boggles my mind how people can get upset that they’re not covering the game. In the end, it’s their site, so why does it bother you?

While I am a GB fan, it’s because they do what they want, and I certainly wouldn’t be angry at Destructoid (for example) for saying they didn’t want to play/review/mention a game I was into. Who really gives a fuck lol.

 

[Nikana]

I tend to agree with gerstman a lot on his opinion about certain games, but there does seemed to be a bit of elitest in him over the years. He seems to have some sort of inner vendetta against the industry in some ways.

This recent game of the year set felt really odd compared to their previous years. It felt like he had zero give in his opinions and becer really debated, especially in the GOTY catergory. I'm still floored they gave it to pub G

but that's just my opinion.

 

[gypsygib]

This is just another idiotic and indirect way of addressing the issue of whether Vávra is racist, which the gaming media seems too afraid of or too incompetent to directly discuss. Focusing on lack of people of color or saying there's insufficient interest in the game is just a symptom of th.

Instead of coming up with BS reasons to criticize the game, they should be asking is Vavra racist? Things like wearing a Burzum shirt every day at Gamescom 2017 (Burzum spoke about and supported racial purity and white supremacy) are telling of his social views as well as his twitter comments.

The gaming media f'd up big time though, instead of directly addressing whether he's racist and if so, should a game made by a racist be supported, they tried to make the issue about the lack of people of color in his game which may have been the most indirect and misguided way of addressing the real concern. Complaining about the lack of people of color in a realistic 13th century European game that takes place in small geographic area is ridiculous to any sensible person, whether white or a person of color. Obviously, if the media had no concerns about Varva being racist they'd never raise the complaint about lack of POC. But that's all the media focused on, inadvertently making the whole argument about racism in this game seem ridiculous. If anything, the media's idiotic focus on lack of POC, gave Vavra and all his supporters a perfect defense against racism, which is clear based on all the comment in this thread.

The assumption that lack of POC in a game equals racist was a very faulty one. If they focused on Vavra and the game being headed by a racist dev they may have gained more traction.

Truth is, a million people bought a game largely influenced by a guy that's probably a racist but don't care because the gaming media made the argument for racism ridiculous. So any racists out there should thank the gaming media, they defeated themselves and made an important issue surrounding this game seem idiotic. They framed the discussion in a manner that precluded any merit to their real argument. Good thing none of these gaming journalists are lawyers.

 

[ironmang]

Probably for the better tbh. They're clearly going to be unable to write an honest review so it's better they skip instead of going in with the mindset that they're going to trash the game.

 

[OldBoyGamer]

So. I really don't want to get into a big argument with anyone on here and I know political views are very emotive etc, but.... Look, I'm not a GB viewer or reader. So I can't really vouch for whether or not they would have done a piece on this game had they not felt the 'head guys has shitty views'. But. I am really surprised by peoples negative reaction to the negative reaction for this game. Surely, it just comes with the territory? For both sides.

If I develop a game and start tweeting anti gun lobby stuff and anti Republican stuff - or as in my case living in the UK - anti Tory, anti UKIP, anti Brexit, anti Daily Mail, anti Sun etc. I would absolutely expect readers of those magazines and supporters of those parties to not buy my game and also, to not publicise my game in a positive light. I would not expect the Daily Mail to review my game. So, why are people expecting others - whether media or not - to give this game positive reviews and leave out the political nature of the main guy?

I don't buy Nestle products because I find their business venture with water in Africa to be so vile and disgusting that I refuse to give them any of my money - despite them having some pretty delish products. How is this different?