Support NeoGAF

[JABEE]

Someone print this out and stick it to a booth.

 

[f0rk]

Just because people in the gaming press are covering a hobby doesn't mean they have to drop all attempt at being professional. They are gaining experience in the journalism profession that could be parlayed into a job covering things other than videogames. And of course they are allowed to be excited about games. They should express that excitement privately to developers though, not through their published work.

Hahahaha, you know how boring the world would be if all enthusiast press did this? Not just in gaming. Lighten up, a point by point breakdown of a game or movie in every preview with no feelings would be awful. One of the first replies in this thread put it best, there only fucking video games.

I know they didn't ask for it, but regardless it's happening and it's bad news for both the gaming press and developers.

It's not perfect, but if publishers want to reward their developers for making good games what other metric are they going to use? Give some examples of an amazing game that doesn't have a metacritic score that reflects it quality that might screw the devs out of money.

 

[JABEE]

Right, I need some input on this as its another practice I am unfamiliar with. When and where does this "judges week" happen, does everyone in the industry take part in it?

If the journalists have already played the games, doesn't this render the entire E3 show completely pointless?

It seems like the Editor in Chief tells everyone else what games are good.

 

[LegendofJoe]

"Journalist" is a wide-ranging term. Billy Bush is a journalist. Al Michaels is a journalist. Harvey from TMZ used to be laughed when he was called a journalist, then he broke major stories like Michael Jackson's death while the major news was reporting flak and some begruding respect was given to tabloid journalism. Ryan Seacrest could be considered a journalist, his radio show carries and actually sometimes breaks news.

You're right, when reporting news there is ideally a detatched and unbiased viewpoint (though I've dug plenty of colorful journalism from reporters I've trusted and enjoyed, this new age where news comes in 120-character Twitter posts and N4G headline rips isn't my style,) but there's a lot more in the media cycle than just news. If we want to break news out from "columnist" editorial writing then I don't mind that, but get past the front page of any major newspaper or magazine (same goes for even 24-hour TV news broadcast) and you're going to find colorful, opinionated writing that breaks your concept of a journalist, it's always there everywhere.

I have no issue with this. I just agree with the OP that the relationship between the gaming press and the industry is unhealthy at times. There is certainly room for colorful opinion and fun as long as the relationship between developers/publishers and the press enables an accurate flow of information and fair criticism that isn't obviously biased in favor of certain types of games or developers.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the professional part, since I firmly believe it's well within their professional right to express.

But then how are we supposed to know what games are really impressing and stirring up the ones who cover them? If they're not allowed to show one semblance of enthusiasm or opinion, what's the point of me hearing what they have to say? If that's the case, sites for game journalism shouldn't even exist. We can just watch videos and trailers and gather all our info from that. I think you're grossly making an analogy between video game "journalism" and real world journalism ala BBC or The Independent for example. That is where neutrality should be exercised.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree to because I believe the unprofessional relationship between some members of the gaming press and developers/publishers is bad for the industry. It is unfortunate too because I know neither side wants that.

 

[LegendofJoe]

Hahahaha, you know how boring the world would be if all enthusiast press did this? Not just in gaming. Lighten up, a point by point breakdown of a game or movie in every preview with no feelings would be awful. One of the first replies in this thread put it best, there only fucking video games.

It's not perfect, but if publishers want to reward their developers for making good games what other metric are they going to use? Give some examples of an amazing game that doesn't have a metacritic score that reflects it quality that might screw the devs out of money.

It's hard to argue against this. I've been told many times that I take things too seriously, but when it comes to work in any field/industry that's just the way I am. So I understand why some people have a hard time understanding where I'm coming from.

The best recent example with regards to your second question that I can think of is Fallout: New Vegas.

 

[John Rabbit]

sycophantic
adj
-using flattery to win favour from individuals wielding influence

I raise you:

symbiosis
n.
1. Biology A close, prolonged association between two or more different organisms of different species that may, but does not necessarily, benefit each member.
2. A relationship of mutual benefit or dependence.

It seems a cycle of inward facing endless promotion, and it looks like a negative thing... but i dont know if it is.

 

[f0rk]

The best recent example with regards to your second question that I can think of is Fallout: New Vegas.

Which had the same numerous technical problems as every Obsidian game. If anything they are the best example of a developer where the bonus system might work, they could put some time into polishing like a world class studio would and then they would get the score to reflect that.

 

[scitek]

Working towards an E3 deadline for any developer is a nightmare in hell. You're working hard for a floor demo and potentially press conference stunner that takes time away from making your release date deadline, but you do it for the publisher. And it is hard, hard, hard work to make it to E3.

If, at the end, some journalist stops by your booth with a badge proclaiming your game, out of all the E3 games, is in the running for the best something-something, then somehow it all feels worth it, aside from the buzz of the crowd of course. It feels good to display those badges. There's a sense of pride there.

I don't understand why you think that's a bad thing Mama Robotnik, but from a developer's standpoint, you're absolutely 100% dead wrong.

How does it feel if their demo was pulled from a press conference like Retro's supposedly was?

 

[grandjedi6]

Silly journalism, E3 isn't even over

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

I see a reason for this thread in my mind, and that is that journos were seen as independant and revered enough both from the publishers and players to have this "OOOOH" effect instead of "how many cheevos did X game score?" that it seems to take the form of.

It would also help if they saved them and slapped more on smaller games after some decent amount of (granted not very easy to do on a show floor) playtesting.

 

[Jake Tower]

Working towards an E3 deadline for any developer is a nightmare in hell. You're working hard for a floor demo and potentially press conference stunner that takes time away from making your release date deadline, but you do it for the publisher. And it is hard, hard, hard work to make it to E3.

If, at the end, some journalist stops by your booth with a badge proclaiming your game, out of all the E3 games, is in the running for the best something-something, then somehow it all feels worth it, aside from the buzz of the crowd of course. It feels good to display those badges. There's a sense of pride there.

I don't understand why you think that's a bad thing Mama Robotnik, but from a developer's standpoint, you're absolutely 100% dead wrong.

Are you down for getting a "shittiest game" award, too?

 

[LegendofJoe]

Which had the same numerous technical problems as every Obsidian game. If anything they are the best example of a developer where the bonus system might work, they could put some time into polishing like a world class studio would and then they would get the score to reflect that.

That won't happen if they're not given adequate time to work of the kinks, which has usually been the case with their games.

 

[wabo]

but seriously, I think if car tuning was our hobby we would probably notice similarly ridiculous stuff.

Edit: also seems like some of those just want to get their own name out. Never heard of "Vandal.net" before.

Pretty much. As long as anyone gives a shit this kind of things will eventually disappear, but many people -industry, *****journalists***** and fans- love the buzz. Same applies with the WOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO in shameful applauses in conferences.

Vandal --> spanish site, so that's why you probably didn't heard of before.

 

[jett]

fixed for forum accuracy

 

[The Technomancer]

fixed for forum accuracy

But that would go on every booth

 

[FStop7]

Right, I need some input on this as its another practice I am unfamiliar with. When and where does this "judges week" happen, does everyone in the industry take part in it?

If the journalists have already played the games, doesn't this render the entire E3 show completely pointless?

There are members of the press and related organizations that are judges. I think it's one person per outlet. Garnett Lee is a judge, so is Jeff Gerstmann. I'm guessing Gamespot, IGN, etc, each have their own judges.

The show isn't rendered pointless because there's a lot more to it. There are a lot of games that aren't submitted for judging. Games that are still in the very early stages of development, often shown behind closed doors under NDA. Then there is the business component of E3. Publishers doing deals. Studios and distributors doing deals. Investors doing deals.

I've never been to E3 but this is how I understand it works, which is basically the same as any other big trade show like NAB, SEMA, etc.

 

[TUROK]

Ew, I actually shuddered at this, I really did.

You shuddered at journalists being impressed with a preliminary showing of a game?

 

[Derrick01]

But that would go on every booth

I would gladly hand them out personally.

 

[Coalition-PezRadar]

Thanks GAF!

http://twitpic.com/9tksne  http://twitpic.com/9tkssi

Most expensive swag for BL2!

 

[GhaleonEB]

Are the publications actually doing the decorating, or do the publishers put them on display in their booth? I don't see anything wrong either way. Outlets have E3 awards, and they give a physical thingy out for the awards (and nominations it seems). I don't really understand why this is bad.

Updated Halo 4 wall:

 

[Diablohead]

I don't think these badges are bad but they are becoming more popular, few years back you were lucky to have 5 on your booth if you were a 'AAA' title, now look :|

 

[faceless007]

Working towards an E3 deadline for any developer is a nightmare in hell. You're working hard for a floor demo and potentially press conference stunner that takes time away from making your release date deadline, but you do it for the publisher. And it is hard, hard, hard work to make it to E3.

If, at the end, some journalist stops by your booth with a badge proclaiming your game, out of all the E3 games, is in the running for the best something-something, then somehow it all feels worth it, aside from the buzz of the crowd of course. It feels good to display those badges. There's a sense of pride there.

I don't understand why you think that's a bad thing Mama Robotnik, but from a developer's standpoint, you're absolutely 100% dead wrong.

You just confirmed the problem: game journalists exist to cater to and satisfy developers, not their readership.