Support NeoGAF

[Touch fuzZy. get BizZay]

so polygon works the way that... well pretty much everything does these days

 

[Majormaxxx]

That statement is a lie and you know it.
Infinite story is like a mental breakdown of a kid that finally got to play with the old toys of his brother who grew out of them.
They took all those established characters, removed half of those and ruined established lore of the other half.
Then they threw in a half-baked, boring and nothing-burger story and empty open world in hopes people won't see the glaring issues the game has on top of introducing things like health bar bosses to the game.

It's a mediocre sci-fi game, but compared to what Halo was, it's utterly terrible and no one that has played the series from the start would say otherwise.
Infinite is only a good game if it's the first Halo you played.

My rating is based on how much I enjoyed the story and gameplay of 1,4,5 and infinite. I thoroughly enjoyed my experience with infinite. I did not enjoy 5. It was convoluted and rushed. Four was OK, but a bit shallow. But better than 5 for sure. One was enjoyable at the time, but now (I played it several years ago, as well as back then) some of the sections have dated design. I have not finished 2,3, reach and odst so I cannot compare infinite to them. Maybe when I complete them, I will agree with you. I still have to say I enjoyed infinite thoroughly. Both story and open world.

 

[Trazyn the Infinite]

I can only speak for my own experience.

I worked in games media during what I would consider to be the hey-day.

In-person E3 was still the mainstay of the industry and a huge event, PAX had become huge, GDC was only really just gaining momentum, and even CES was still relevant. Apple was irrelevant to gaming. Mobile was still nascent as a whole. F2P was a distant concept. DLC was *just* starting. Magazines and print were still the bigger focus vs. online pubs. Private press events and junkets happened a ton.

Ars had incredible journalistic integrity that was well established, but at the time, we were still the young buck in the gaming space. Ben was doing it alone when I started, and it was a sub blog off the main page.

I worked for the company for a few years, and Opposable Thumbs — the gaming blog — grew substantially in both scope and contribution to the top line.

I never once faced any pressure from anyone on any of your described fronts.

My comp was based on a per article rate. I was paid a flat rate for blog posts and a premium for front-page long-form posts. I was also paid a bonus for each article that hit the front page of Reddit, Digg, Slashdot, or the popular content aggregators at the time.

That bonus had the potential to incent inflammatory content, but that's where editorial team became a huge part of the process. The editorial team was not incented to publish anything in particular, and the stable of writers were always competing not for the bonus but to get published at all.

That's because Ars had at the time a very intense editorial process for both fact-checking and also for grammar and style. Ars was very, very, very strict on quality of writing: it was essential to the livelihood of the site that the quality bar remain super high. But content control in all contexts largely remained with the writer (aside from scenarios involving specific law-related content because of the potential for libel suits).

The ad team was completely unrelated and not at all involved with the content team. I worked there for years, and I don't even know who was on that team. Never once knew anything about them nor was my work in any way related to them.

But Ars was an anomaly, from what I remember. When I talked to some of my peers at the time (e.g., Kotaku, Destructoid, etc.) during trips to conferences and on iRC and the like, it was abundantly clear that the following things were going on in a big way:

• Legit blacklisting by PR teams and agencies if too much truth came out or something was deemed too negative
• Legit favoritism of specific publications based on the potential to affect sales
• Legit quid pro quo with respect to the feedback loop of you gave the review, you got the early copy, we used your quote on the back of the box or the trailer, more subscribers to your magazine / site came, more ad spend
• Review copies and merch were 100% gifted to the favorites
• Who you worked for affected everything

As far as I'm concerned, games media has always been a rigged game.

So how did Ars dodge this? Gaming was only a very small portion of its traffic and its revenue — because Ars was way ahead of the game on the subscription model for premium content and because it ran a lean operation.

I love Ars to this day, and while I needed to move on for financial and career reasons, to this day I hold it as my favourite job and probably always will — not because of gaming, which I obviously love as I'm still on here, but because I got the freedom to do deep research, to formulate a studied opinion, and to express it as creatively as I could for an audience of peers and superiors who were willing, able, and excited to discuss things in depth.

No gaming rag operates that way — not then, and not now. That's why, despite some of his bombast and celebrity, I would take Ben's side. He contributed to all of what made Ars great.

He was also one of the biggest proponents in ruining gaming “journalism” as a whole. Then again, everyone in this incident are fucking cunts and we would all be better served if they were ostracized from the industry.

 

[ReBurn]

Website reviews have been useless for 15+ years now, I’m more surprised they still do them.

Yep. Twitch and youtube are where you go to see what they're like for yourself.

 

[Fuz]

I can only speak for my own experience.

I worked in games media during what I would consider to be the hey-day.

In-person E3 was still the mainstay of the industry and a huge event, PAX had become huge, GDC was only really just gaining momentum, and even CES was still relevant. Apple was irrelevant to gaming. Mobile was still nascent as a whole. F2P was a distant concept. DLC was *just* starting. Magazines and print were still the bigger focus vs. online pubs. Private press events and junkets happened a ton.

Ars had incredible journalistic integrity that was well established, but at the time, we were still the young buck in the gaming space. Ben was doing it alone when I started, and it was a sub blog off the main page.

I worked for the company for a few years, and Opposable Thumbs — the gaming blog — grew substantially in both scope and contribution to the top line.

I never once faced any pressure from anyone on any of your described fronts.

My comp was based on a per article rate. I was paid a flat rate for blog posts and a premium for front-page long-form posts. I was also paid a bonus for each article that hit the front page of Reddit, Digg, Slashdot, or the popular content aggregators at the time.

That bonus had the potential to incent inflammatory content, but that's where editorial team became a huge part of the process. The editorial team was not incented to publish anything in particular, and the stable of writers were always competing not for the bonus but to get published at all.

That's because Ars had at the time a very intense editorial process for both fact-checking and also for grammar and style. Ars was very, very, very strict on quality of writing: it was essential to the livelihood of the site that the quality bar remain super high. But content control in all contexts largely remained with the writer (aside from scenarios involving specific law-related content because of the potential for libel suits).

The ad team was completely unrelated and not at all involved with the content team. I worked there for years, and I don't even know who was on that team. Never once knew anything about them nor was my work in any way related to them.

But Ars was an anomaly, from what I remember. When I talked to some of my peers at the time (e.g., Kotaku, Destructoid, etc.) during trips to conferences and on iRC and the like, it was abundantly clear that the following things were going on in a big way:

• Legit blacklisting by PR teams and agencies if too much truth came out or something was deemed too negative
• Legit favoritism of specific publications based on the potential to affect sales
• Legit quid pro quo with respect to the feedback loop of you gave the review, you got the early copy, we used your quote on the back of the box or the trailer, more subscribers to your magazine / site came, more ad spend
• Review copies and merch were 100% gifted to the favorites
• Who you worked for affected everything

As far as I'm concerned, games media has always been a rigged game.

So how did Ars dodge this? Gaming was only a very small portion of its traffic and its revenue — because Ars was way ahead of the game on the subscription model for premium content and because it ran a lean operation.

I love Ars to this day, and while I needed to move on for financial and career reasons, to this day I hold it as my favourite job and probably always will — not because of gaming, which I obviously love as I'm still on here, but because I got the freedom to do deep research, to formulate a studied opinion, and to express it as creatively as I could for an audience of peers and superiors who were willing, able, and excited to discuss things in depth.

No gaming rag operates that way — not then, and not now. That's why, despite some of his bombast and celebrity, I would take Ben's side. He contributed to all of what made Ars great.

Great post, thanks for the testimony.
But this is kind of a Pulcinella's secret, for people who always followed the industry. Who was invited to the famous E3 parties?

Anyway, this:

Ars was very, very, very strict on quality of writing: it was essential to the livelihood of the site that the quality bar remain super high.

Please bring it back.

 

[Uiki]

So... do we need to act surprised?

 

[M1chl]

Who the fuck is surprised?

 

[Zathalus]

Amazing how some are trying to twist this into a Microsoft vs Sony thing.

 

[Adam_802]

Lol fuck ben kuchera.

This is one of the pieces of shit who wrote lies and slanderous BS about Colin Moriarty.

Love watching these scumbags melt down.

 

[Hendrick's]

After all these years their last of us review score finally makes sense, terrible website

Agreed. It was too high.

Joking aside, I thought that review was the most accurate to what I experienced and I think an 8 is what the game deserved.

Also, that review was well before Chris Plante working there.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Agreed. It was too high.

Joking aside, I thought that review was the most accurate to what I experienced and I think an 8 is what the game deserved.

Also, that review was well before Chris Plante working there.

Chris Plante was there from day 1

Are people really saying an 8 was too low TLOU? Jesus

 

[KaiserBecks]

What a bold move to make this public after getting fired. A true journalist indeed.

 

[Hendrick's]

Chris Plante was there from day 1

Since 2017 according to LinkedIn.

*Nevermind I see that he was co-founder just not editor until 2017.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Since 2017 according to LinkedIn.

I remember him from their cringey launch stuff

 

[Tams]

The way Polygon launched already made it shady. It went from not existing to this "big deal" over night. I've always seen that site as a big business plant and it is nice for that take to go from tinfoil hat theory to confirmed.

Nah, Polygon wasn't a shady launch. As soon as The Verge did well, it was obvious that they'd make a dedicated site for games next. Now launch of the The Verge... yeah, that was dodgy. They had late night talk show slots lined up far too quickly.

 

[Chukhopops]

This quote is from a review for a psx game and from a completely different site. Stop spreading fake bullcrap.

https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/alien-resurrection-review/1900-2637344/

Every time I want to be mad I think about the time they called Shin Megami Tensei V a stripped down version of Persona 5 Royal.

What a bold move to make this public after getting fired. A true journalist indeed.

He knows his career in gaming press is dead anyway and was dead the moment he was fired from Polygon. I actually expect more juicy bits in the near future.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Management changing scores is nothing new, and it doesn't just happen in gaming. If a highly popular game comes out, and one that might even be from a sponsor of said site, no way the head honchos are going to agree with a lowly 6 or something.

Someone else said shit games simply won't be reviewed anymore, this is true. Perhaps because it might hurt the perception of the medium or it might be a waste of time to play and write about them. Times certainly have changed. In the past, utter shit games were also reviewed. But these days you basically see lots of 7-9 scores and not much of outliers. Its generally like truly bad games aren't being made anymore and if they are, see Cyberpunk release on PS4/X1. Completely hyped up pre-launch, then universally shat on to save face. I have a hard time even finding honesty on this occassion, its just that they persuaded gamers to pre order it while I think preview copies and play sessions etc already had to be alarming. Its weird that no questions were asked about last-gen versions either, as far as I'm aware.

I stopped reading reviews ages ago. I've resorted to Easy Allies for a while but they've gone down the shitter as well.

I treat it like movies, i'll see an average like RT does and I get a good idea. If a game has 80 average or higher, its likely worthwhile.

 

[Edgelord79]

Stevivor is the only video game review site I trust.

Thanks for letting us know.

 

[Kiya's Guard]

 

[Laptop1991]

I'm glad i never took any notice of their reviews then, although this doesn't surprise me at all.

 

[Begleiter]

He knows his career in gaming press is dead anyway and was dead the moment he was fired from Polygon. I actually expect more juicy bits in the near future.

This would be fun, but I don't know if he's burned enough bridges for that. It's a dangerous game to play unless he can leverage it into a Patreon, similar to what Colin Moriarty did.

 

[SF Kosmo]

He knows his career in gaming press is dead anyway and was dead the moment he was fired from Polygon.

It ain't much of a career to be honest. Even if you're doing it on a very high level (and Ben was), the pay is pretty mid. Ben had gone as far as this career can reasonably take him.

Gaming journalism is fun, and of course.it's great to work on something you're passionate about, but there's a reason most people move on after 5 or 10 years. You can make way more, working a lot less, using the same skill set and qualifications in almost any other industry.

Literally almost everyone I worked with has moved on. They're all working in PR or publishing, or tech. Or just as copywriters, UX writers etc. I guess a couple have found their way as podcasters, but for the most part everyone sold out and moved on once they settled down and started families and priorities shifted.

 

[Chronicle]

Awesome! I love a little drama!

 

[BennyBlanco]

This would be fun, but I don't know if he's burned enough bridges for that. It's a dangerous game to play unless he can leverage it into a Patreon, similar to what Colin Moriarty did.

Difference between Moriarty and Gerstmann and a guy like Kuchera is that the first 2 actually have fans and were known personalities

It ain't much of a career to be honest. Even if you're doing it on a very high level (and Ben was), the pay is pretty mid. Ben had gone as far as this career can reasonably take him.

Gaming journalism is fun, and of course.it's great to work on something you're passionate about, but there's a reason most people move on after 5 or 10 years. You can make way more, working a lot less, using the same skill set and qualifications in almost any other industry.

Literally almost everyone I worked with has moved on. They're all working in PR or publishing, or tech. Or just as copywriters, UX writers etc. I guess a couple have found their way as podcasters, but for the most part everyone sold out and moved on once they settled down and started families and priorities shifted.

He said in another deleted tweet he was making 107k a year. Not bad at all considering what his duties were.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Nice cherry picking there. Good thing you're not biased.

 

[Trazyn the Infinite]

Chris Plante was there from day 1

Are people really saying an 8 was too low TLOU? Jesus

It was way too damn high. But let’s be honest, all the reviews from Polygon were fucking trash.

 

[TLZ]

I just always see people cry conspiracy about review scores and maybe they weren't all crazy.

Of course we're not. Whenever money is involved it's a different ball game.

 

[BadBurger]

If the accusations are true then fuck Polygon.

However, it’s telling how many people are using this incident as ‘proof’ that the entire games journalism industry is dodgy.

Polygon has never been the leader in games journalism no matter how much it wanted to be, and Polygon has never set the rules of how every other publication in the world does its business.

If this ends up being true then all it does is prove that Polygon’s management is fucked. It has nothing to do with (modern day) Gamespot, or IGN or any of the thousands of smaller sites out there. Until you can find evidence of wrongdoing right now at a specific site, then that site and its writers shouldn’t be dragged into this shit.

You only need to look through the replies here to see completely unproven shit like “some reviewers are obviously biased”. Too many people are eager to tar everyone with the same brush and this Polygon incident should be about Kuchera and Polygon management, not bizarre leaps of logic like “AHA! So that’s why that PlayStation site gave Gran Turismo a 9”.

Giant Bomb happened because Jeff Gerstmann gave a harsh but honest review for a game that his employer had accepted a lot of advertising money from. That was in like 2007. This kind of complete editorial control isn't new to the industry.

 

[Bitmap Frogs]

Giant Bomb happened because Jeff Gerstmann gave a harsh but honest review for a game that his employer had accepted a lot of advertising money from. That was in like 2007. This kind of complete editorial control isn't new to the industry.

Videogame media is worthless.

I check out Karak videos and see if it's the style of game I'd enjoy, and that's what works for me.

 

[justiceiro]

Gamer gaters will come back from the dead based on these Tweety alone, won't they? Geez...

 

[MayauMiao]

That explains the perfect 10 from Polygon for Gone Home

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I can only speak for my own experience.

I worked in games media during what I would consider to be the hey-day.

In-person E3 was still the mainstay of the industry and a huge event, PAX had become huge, GDC was only really just gaining momentum, and even CES was still relevant. Apple was irrelevant to gaming. Mobile was still nascent as a whole. F2P was a distant concept. DLC was *just* starting. Magazines and print were still the bigger focus vs. online pubs. Private press events and junkets happened a ton.

Ars had incredible journalistic integrity that was well established, but at the time, we were still the young buck in the gaming space. Ben was doing it alone when I started, and it was a sub blog off the main page.

I worked for the company for a few years, and Opposable Thumbs — the gaming blog — grew substantially in both scope and contribution to the top line.

I never once faced any pressure from anyone on any of your described fronts.

My comp was based on a per article rate. I was paid a flat rate for blog posts and a premium for front-page long-form posts. I was also paid a bonus for each article that hit the front page of Reddit, Digg, Slashdot, or the popular content aggregators at the time.

That bonus had the potential to incent inflammatory content, but that's where editorial team became a huge part of the process. The editorial team was not incented to publish anything in particular, and the stable of writers were always competing not for the bonus but to get published at all.

That's because Ars had at the time a very intense editorial process for both fact-checking and also for grammar and style. Ars was very, very, very strict on quality of writing: it was essential to the livelihood of the site that the quality bar remain super high. But content control in all contexts largely remained with the writer (aside from scenarios involving specific law-related content because of the potential for libel suits).

The ad team was completely unrelated and not at all involved with the content team. I worked there for years, and I don't even know who was on that team. Never once knew anything about them nor was my work in any way related to them.

But Ars was an anomaly, from what I remember. When I talked to some of my peers at the time (e.g., Kotaku, Destructoid, etc.) during trips to conferences and on iRC and the like, it was abundantly clear that the following things were going on in a big way:

• Legit blacklisting by PR teams and agencies if too much truth came out or something was deemed too negative
• Legit favoritism of specific publications based on the potential to affect sales
• Legit quid pro quo with respect to the feedback loop of you gave the review, you got the early copy, we used your quote on the back of the box or the trailer, more subscribers to your magazine / site came, more ad spend
• Review copies and merch were 100% gifted to the favorites
• Who you worked for affected everything

As far as I'm concerned, games media has always been a rigged game.

So how did Ars dodge this? Gaming was only a very small portion of its traffic and its revenue — because Ars was way ahead of the game on the subscription model for premium content and because it ran a lean operation.

I love Ars to this day, and while I needed to move on for financial and career reasons, to this day I hold it as my favourite job and probably always will — not because of gaming, which I obviously love as I'm still on here, but because I got the freedom to do deep research, to formulate a studied opinion, and to express it as creatively as I could for an audience of peers and superiors who were willing, able, and excited to discuss things in depth.

No gaming rag operates that way — not then, and not now. That's why, despite some of his bombast and celebrity, I would take Ben's side. He contributed to all of what made Ars great.

Awesome post. Appreciate the personal experience.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

See anything wrong with this picture?

Oh, yeah, definitively, all these different font sizes are wrong as hell.

More seriously, I don't read Polygon, I play with them.

I came to the conclusion a long time ago that game "journalim" is mostly a joke nowadays, sadly.

 

[Roni]

What???

Pretty sure this is fake, I think that was a review for a PS1 game

Alien Resurrection, but nevertheless it's a take that absolutely didn't age well. But given Doom's coverage and how good it is, does fit the bill...

 

[KingHippo1967]

Giant Bomb happened because Jeff Gerstmann gave a harsh but honest review for a game that his employer had accepted a lot of advertising money from. That was in like 2007. This kind of complete editorial control isn't new to the industry.

When you have to go back a decade and a half to find your best example, then maybe that sort of thing isn't as prevalent as you're implying.

 

[Dr. Wilkinson]

It’s their website they can publish what they want.

LOL. Yes, never question anything, ever. Good lesson! Glad we are having such deep discussions and critical thinking on this forum.

This has to be the like the worst take I have ever read on here.

Good Lord…. *facepalm*

 

[lovetalkgames]

LOL. Yes, never question anything, ever. Good lesson! Glad we are having such deep discussions and critical thinking on this forum.

This has to be the like the worst take I have ever read on here.

Good Lord…. *facepalm*

It’s someone at polygon’s review of a video game, who cares?

 

[Loope]

Videogames are a multiple billion dollar market, and first impressions or first wave of reviews directly impact the sales of a game.

Without any sort of neutral oversight, it was always going to end up with publishers mingling with reviewers.

Not only that, but with the click and ad revenue business model, there's a feedback loop between review sites and publishers, where reviewers don't want to risk 'offending' publishers and risk not getting scoops, interviews, etc.

See anything wrong with this picture?

The game is rigged folks.

Not that i don't agree, but interesting choice.

 

[SF Kosmo]

He said in another deleted tweet he was making 107k a year. Not bad at all considering what his duties were.

For a management level editorial position in any other industry? It's below market. And Ben is in probably in the top 0.1% of people doing game journalism, and he's making less than I make at my very mid-level, non-management job in big tech.

That's not to belittle his achievements at all. On the contrary, I'm saying he hit the level cap in this career, so moving on to something else is probably going to serve him well.

 

[mckmas8808]

edit- he deleted the tweets, naturally

So Ben Kuchera got fired from Polygon and is in the midst of a bizarre twitter meltdown. But I find this part pretty spicy. He was their "reviews editor" so you would think the guy could assign a game any score he wanted, but he's claiming management rewrites reviews and completely dictates scores. They have definitely had some head scratching scores over the years. Then again Ben Kuchera is a well known douche and could certainly be lying.

If mods don't think this appropriate or newsworthy - I get it. I just always see people cry conspiracy about review scores and maybe they weren't all crazy.

People also knew this guy was a dope, yet he was telling the truth about steroids in MLB Baseball.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

For a management level editorial position in any other industry? It's below market. And Ben is in probably in the top 0.1% of people doing game journalism, and he's making less than I make at my very mid-level, non-management job in big tech.

He was not working in big tech, so this comparison is not analogous.

For an editorial position in gaming, I’m shocked he made that much.

 

[SF Kosmo]

He was not working in big tech, so this comparison is not analogous.

I think you're losing the context of the conversation leading up to that post.

My point here is that if he takes his skills and experience to an adjacent industry he will make more money and that's proabably the best path for him. He should be proud of what he accomplished and he should cash in on that experience now by leaving journalism.

I worked as a game journalist for six years. I and almost everyone I ever worked with took jobs in adjacent industries or on the publishing side of the game industry and makes a lot more now. It's what you do.

For an editorial position in gaming, I’m shocked he made that much.

Absolutely. Like I said he hit the level cap, he achieved as much as anyone pursuing this could hope to. And so he shouldn't look back.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

We already knew.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

My point here is that if he takes his skills and experience to an adjacent industry he will make more money and that's proabably the best path for him. He should be proud of what he accomplished and he should cash in on that experience now by leaving journalism.

I worked as a game journalist for six years. I and almost everyone I ever worked with took jobs in adjacent industries or on the publishing side of the game industry and makes a lot more now. It's what you do.

What do you consider a lot more than 107k?

His skills aren’t in software engineering.

Perhaps these figures are skewed by working in a very HCOL, assuming the SF in your nickname is San Francisco

I have a hard time believing ex-Journalists with those soft skills are making all that much more than he already was

 

[SF Kosmo]

What do you consider a lot more than 107k?

While I can't speak to exact numbers for other people's jobs, my former managers and editors (people I would consider more comparable to Ben than myself) are all working executive level positions (director, VP, etc) now, mostly in dev or publishing and based on glassdoor estimates would all be making at least $250,000.

His skills aren’t in software engineering.

Neither are mine or any of the people I'm talking about. I'm a writer. I used that experience to get jobs in copywriting, communications, and technical writing. And I was nowhere near the level of experience of a guy like Ben Kuchera, who also has a ton of profile, industry connections, management experience etc.

Perhaps these figures are skewed by working in a very HCOL, assuming the SF in your nickname is San Francisco

"SF Kosmo" is a reference to the villains from the game Bangai-O. I don't live in SF, but I do live in a place with a similarly HCOL so that's true.

I have a hard time believing ex-Journalists with those soft skills are making all that much more than he already was

Maybe not the day after they left, but give it five years? Yeah, for sure.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

While I can't speak to exact numbers for other people's jobs, my former managers and editors (people I would consider more comparable to Ben than myself) are all working executive level positions (director, VP, etc) now, mostly in dev or publishing and based on glassdoor estimates would all be making at least $250,000.


Neither are mine or any of the people I'm talking about. I'm a writer. I used that experience to get jobs in copywriting, communications, and technical writing. And I was nowhere near the level of experience of a guy like Ben Kuchera, who also has a ton of profile, industry connections, management experience etc.


"SF Kosmo" is a reference to the villains from the game Bangai-O. I don't live in SF, but I do live in a place with a similarly HCOL so that's true.


Maybe not the day after they left, but give it five years? Yeah, for sure.

You are assigning way too much clout to Ben Kuchera. There are SWE leads in gaming not making much more than him.

VP and Directors oversee hundreds of people. Maybe some that you know managed to work their career into those roles, but most won’t

 

[Dorago]

Everyone figured out how access media worked 20 years ago but it seems like we need to have a big meltdown every few years to keep interest up. Media is fake. It's all lies published to manipulate. The truth comes out eventually but when so many have invested in promoting falsehood those false narratives become their reality. Religion is the opiate of the masses. Media is the religion of modern man. The difference between modern religion and ancients ones is the holy book doesn't get rewritten every other week.

 

[Tams]

For a management level editorial position in any other industry? It's below market. And Ben is in probably in the top 0.1% of people doing game journalism, and he's making less than I make at my very mid-level, non-management job in big tech.

That's not to belittle his achievements at all. On the contrary, I'm saying he hit the level cap in this career, so moving on to something else is probably going to serve him well.

You work in big tech, aka lala land.

I joke, sort of. Most of the world is not like big tech or finance though.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

For a management level editorial position in any other industry? It's below market. And Ben is in probably in the top 0.1% of people doing game journalism, and he's making less than I make at my very mid-level, non-management job in big tech.

That's not to belittle his achievements at all. On the contrary, I'm saying he hit the level cap in this career, so moving on to something else is probably going to serve him well.

$107k is nothing considering he’s supposed to be a high level manager guy. I guess maybe gaming and tech media pays shit.

I was making more than that years ago when I was a finance analyst with zero people reporting to me. And also annual bonus on top of it.

 

[Trazyn the Infinite]

$107k is nothing considering he’s supposed to be a high level manager guy. I guess maybe gaming and tech media pays shit.

I was making more than that years ago when I was a finance analyst with zero people reporting to me. And also annual bonus on top of it.

107k is at least 4 times what he should be paid, given how worthless his content is and his greater contributions to the industry.