Games Journalism! Wainwright/Florence/Tomb Raider/Eurogamer/Libel Threats/Doritos

Status
Not open for further replies.
May 9, 2011
34,663
0
0
So RPS don't think they should write an article about a subject that for me ultimately comes down to the potential misrepresentation of games to the game BUYING public.

Yet they are prepared to publish a pretty crass article that mocks the issue.

From RPS:

and the article goes on.....

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/10/26/the-flare-path-blows-the-whistle/

Poor show RPS, very poor.
Not only are you very late, the writer's style went waaaay over your head.
 
May 19, 2010
44,040
0
645
So RPS don't think they should write an article about a subject that for me ultimately comes down to the potential misrepresentation of games to the game BUYING public.

Yet they are prepared to publish a pretty crass article that mocks the issue.

From RPS:

and the article goes on.....

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/10/26/the-flare-path-blows-the-whistle/

Poor show RPS, very poor.
They are partners with Eurogamer. It is obvious. Look at the bottom of their site.
 
Dec 5, 2008
14,974
0
0
www.neogaf.com
This.

RPS is the closest thing we have to the gaming site utopia people are asking for. I can´t think of any other site that has been close to deliver the kind trashing RPS has given to the big publishers - Activitision, Ubisoft, EA and even Valve.

It´s one thing to think that they should cover this story more, but please try to not loose it completely.
At least for me it still remains so. I just don't agree with their assessment in this particular case. What I sense from what I read these last days from Kotaku guys and now from RPS John Walker, is that they think that people are distressed only because all this ruckus resulted in Robert Florence stepping down from his Eurogamer column writing gig. That might been the initial focus of the outrage and even of this thread, but right now the focus of this discussion it's indeed the central theme of Robert's original article. The relationship between games writers and PR is not healthy as it can give an image of impropriety that will ultimately damage the writers image towards their public. Games writers and big outlets should talk about this, argue what can be done to change the current status quo and write about it to their audience in the interest of full disclosure. This is not "inside baseball", or "how the sausage is made" talk with little interest for the general public, it' s fundamental for people that want to follow news about their favorite hobby that they trust the messenger. Complete transparency and disclosure should help a lot. But it won't be enough. Games writers should distance themselves as much it is possible for the good execution of their work and try to maintain a completely professional relation with PR.
 
Jul 25, 2006
1,764
32
1,020
So RPS don't think they should write an article about a subject that for me ultimately comes down to the potential misrepresentation of games to the game BUYING public.

Yet they are prepared to publish a pretty crass article that mocks the issue.

From RPS:

and the article goes on.....

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/10/26/the-flare-path-blows-the-whistle/

Poor show RPS, very poor.
They are not mocking the issue. This satirical piece is attempting to demonstrate that not all journalists will have their ethics compromised by free stuff. If you feel that most reviews can be bought for the price of a video game mug, then I would love to know what other absolutes exist within your world view.
 
Apr 13, 2012
8,095
1
0
If anything, this has just reminded me to get my game news from multiple sources. If Gaf hates a game, the majors sites all loved it, then I know the answer is probably somewhere in the middle. You just have to be skeptical of any piece that's too flattering or too hyperbolic. If journalists are corrupt, then hopefully I'll be able to judge that from the article and take from it what I can discern.

I just wish that this job of figuring out the truth was easier.
 
Apr 23, 2011
5,642
0
490
This.

RPS is the closest thing we have to the gaming site utopia people are asking for. I can´t think of any other site that has been close to deliver the kind trashing RPS has given to the big publishers - Activitision, Ubisoft, EA and even Valve.

It´s one thing to think that they should cover this story more, but please try to not loose it completely.
Being better than kotaku doesn't make them immune to criticism. With the pedestal they've been placed on, it stands out all the more.
 
Apr 23, 2008
34,712
0
0
34
John Walker from RPS wrote the first article before the Eurogamer edit, two more after it, hosted a fourth written by Florece itself in which he implies that publishers and MCV editoral's were involved. He also has spoken strongly against this on twitter. It seems to me that you guys are looking really hard for corruption in games media when he has being doing it for a while in his blog before you even cared. Granted, they have talked about the behind the scenes before but they tend to be cheeky.

The guy explained since the beginning that he wasnt gonna involve RPS because the site is about games, granted, he has put critiques in the sites before, but its not like he has tried to stay away from the issue, playing it down, avoid blaming eurogamer or say he is not a game journalism. Im a avid reader from the site, and believe me, you dont need to read their code of ethics to know where they stand on this issue.
This whole controversy has the potential to finally reach some sort of critical mass due to a sudden confluence of events. The pieces John Walker wrote on his blog are excellent and everyone has said that from the start. But keeping it solely tucked away in a blog especially now isn't doing it the proper service when RPS is one of the most-frequented gaming sites in Europe.

People are simply conveying disappointment that the guys at RPS aren't using the significant platform they have to get the conversation to significantly more people. If you don't want the issue to simply disappear into the ether then you should want it circulating to as many people as possible, and at this stage that's the most important thing. Or nothing will ever change, and by next week everything will be forgotten. Nothing may ever change, anyway, but one way to make certain it won't is to limit the discussion to something that never crawls out from its underground dwelling.
 
Jul 25, 2005
5,241
0
0
They are not mocking the issue. This satirical piece is attempting to demonstrate that not all journalists will have their ethics compromised by free stuff. If you feel that most reviews can be bought for the price of a video game mug, then I would love to know what other absolutes exist within your world view.
It was a poor piece that totally misses the point. And is also the only thing that RPS have up about the issue right?
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Feb 7, 2010
10,049
0
700
Ore-Gone.. not Ory-Gone.
What on earth are you talking about?

I hate this "well d'uh" reply that comes up on NeoGAF all too often. You are implying that you somehow have a perfect grasp on the writing, conduct and motivation of all gaming websites.

I have found this discussion hugely insightful and interesting. I consider myself better informed because of it, and am more well-prepared to be skeptical about journalism in multiple fields. I'm also more comfortable with why I find doing anything PRish for my games a less than wholesome act. Heaven forbid someone might learn something.
It was a direct reply to ConMan, who implied he felt lied to because he once viewed gaming sites as pure forms of journalism.

I am implying that someone can look at most of the big gaming sites and see them for what they are.
 
Jul 7, 2009
46,557
0
0
RPS does not get a free pass.

John Walker said this:


John Walker said:
So much as we haven’t covered Lance Armstrong’s controversy, because we’re not a site about sports, we haven’t talked about this story, because we’re not a site about games journalists.
Which is patently absurd.

This IS about games and the games industry. How the games industry tries to influence the media that covers their games is not about games?

Seems like something RPS most certainly should be covering.

That fact that RPS is one of the best and most credible gaming sites just makes it all the more disappointing.
 
Jun 29, 2008
10,349
0
0
I like RPS a lot. And I am not even saying that they absolutely need to cover this story. However that excuse they gave is pretty lame. So I see no reason not to call them out on it. Again, nobody is above criticism and being critical doesn't automatically mean "worst shill in the world." It can be simply that a really good site and really cool people kind of missed the boat on this one.

It doesn't always have to be "you are best site in the world and above all criticism" or "you are the worst shill in the world and everything you do sucks."
They're not perfect, of course not. And people are right to voice their opinion about this if they feel it's wrong. But some people really need to be a bit less aggresive and unreasonable. If people can´t put any restraint at all in their posts, we're just going to end up with a Monty Python mob.
 
May 20, 2007
6,313
0
0
LDN
It was a direct reply to ConMan, who implied he felt lied to because he once viewed gaming sites as pure forms of journalism.

I am implying that someone can look at most of the big gaming sites and see them for what they are.
A couple of pages ago you were trying to claim that their is no evidence(or even reason to suspect) that sites were being influenced by PR, now you are trying to claim that it is obvious just by looking at the big sites that they are clearly influenced, any particular reason for this odd chance of direction?
 
Nov 6, 2006
4,455
0
0
They're not perfect, of course not. And people are right to voice their opinion about this if they feel it's wrong. But some people really need to be a bit less aggresive and unreasonable. If people can´t put any restraint at all in their posts, we're just going to end up with a Monty Python sketch mob.
Oh I agree. That's the internet. And where possible, people should certainly be encouraged to calm their rhetoric so that it seems reasonable (and is therefore more effective and not just cathartic). I think for the most part, this thread is pretty level headed in that regard.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Feb 7, 2010
10,049
0
700
Ore-Gone.. not Ory-Gone.
A couple of pages ago you were trying to claim that their is no evidence(or even reason to suspect) that sites were being influenced by PR, now you are trying to claim that it is obvious just by looking at the big sites that they are clearly influenced, any particular reason for this odd chance of direction?

I never made that claim. Show me where I said outright that there was no evidence and it doesn't happen. It does happen, I disagree with how much some of you seem to think it does.

By looking at any large gaming site you can clearly see them for what they are, an entertainment blog focusing on games. You have a mix between press releases, previews, trailers, funny stories, reviews, and some real pieces of journalism.

They aren't just one thing.

You guys are great at slanting everything you read to your own agenda.
 
Aug 12, 2007
4,591
0
0
Did you even read what you wrote?



You are directly implying that you feel like you were lied too because you once thought gaming websites were something than what they are.

That is disingenuous to say the least. Your username seems to fit.
Unlike you, I don't think "integrity" is some exceptional thing. I don't think it's "pure" or "idealistic." It's a decision and a commitment, no more difficult or exceptional than deciding to be good at one's job or faithful to one's friends or whatever. It isn't difficult, nor is it some rarefied domain of angels and saints.

And most games writers say (even the ones who claim they aren't journalists) that they pride themselves on their integrity. So, no, I don't think I'm being at all disingenuous. I'm sorry your life is so filled with cynicism.

I do in fact feel let down and disappointed by the response of the press. And rightly so. They're human beings. This has all been rather disappointing and disillusioning. If it weren't, so many of us wouldn't care so much.
 
Jul 25, 2005
5,241
0
0
I never made that claim.

By looking at any large gaming site you can clearly see them for what they are, an entertainment blog focusing on games. You have a mix between press releases, previews, trailers, funny stories, reviews, and some real pieces of journalism.

They aren't just one thing.

You guys are perfect at slanting everything you read to your own agenda.
You miss all of the points again and again. There are a lot going on here.

No one is upset that Kotaku write fluff stories, the criticism came that their EIC claimed that this is not an important enough story to run, which is at odds with the fact that Kotaku runs mainly filler.

The problem is the claim and facade that they have integrity, and can be trusted to be impartial, when they are acting in a way very much at odds with that and then not seeing the problem.
 
Mar 11, 2010
2,723
0
0
Unlike you, I don't think "integrity" is some exceptional thing. I don't think it's "pure" or "idealistic." It's a decision and a commitment, no more difficult or exceptional than deciding to be good at one's job or faithful to one's friends or whatever. It isn't difficult, nor is it some rarefied domain of angels and saints.

And most games writers say (even the ones who claim they aren't journalists) that they pride themselves on their integrity. So, no, I don't think I'm being at all disingenuous. I'm sorry your life is so filled with cynicism.

I do in fact feel let down and disappointed by the response of the press. And rightly so. They're human beings. A few of whom I know personally, others I "know" only through their work. This has all been rather disappointing and disillusioning. If it weren't, so many of us wouldn't care so much.
This is a hell of a reply. Thank you for your recent input as the thread has progressed. While there are definitely some rather extreme replies and gut reactions, i feel like some real discussion has progressed in interesting avenues as more people chimed in or more things have been brought to light (or away as the current discussion topic seems to be in relation to awareness of the issue/article not being brought up in enough websites)
 
Jan 2, 2012
2,275
16
470
They are not mocking the issue. This satirical piece is attempting to demonstrate that not all journalists will have their ethics compromised by free stuff. If you feel that most reviews can be bought for the price of a video game mug, then I would love to know what other absolutes exist within your world view.
It's obviously satire but without a serious companion piece it does give the impression that the site views what many see as a serious issue as something of a joke. RPS can post a satirical piece but not report on what that piece is satirising? That really seems off to me.
 
Sep 8, 2006
7,634
0
0
If they can't (or wont because of that relationship) they should just come out and say it.
It's pretty apparent to me that they're just totally misjudging how important this is to their readers. A lot of their readers, at least.

With all the consumer advocacy and criticism of alarmist stories about the effect of games on children, I would have assumed that he would get that this would interest their readers as well. It's abundantly clear where he draws the line for RPS, but I don't understand why they wouldn't want to expand the scope at least temporarily.
I hoped that Jim would have at least included it in his "Sunday Papers" (a regular feature where he links to interesting articles, some unrelated to games), but there was no mention of it there, either.

This all just makes me less interested in the entirety of games media, not just reviews. Granted, I haven't been reading all that much to being with, most of my exposure to the press is through podcasts these days (and the odd feature and interview), but it makes me question what the value of games media is.
RPS will remain in my feed list because I feel like I've gotten to know the tastes of the core team and I appreciate their input, much like I do the impressions of my fellow forum users, but I can't help but feel that they're making themselves (even more?) redundant as a service.
 
Jul 25, 2006
1,764
32
1,020
It was a poor piece that totally misses the point. And is also the only thing that RPS have up about the issue right?
Isn't that a matter of opinion? If the point was to reinforce that not ALL game journalists can be bought for the price for free stuff, then it is spot on. If RPS chooses to not write about the issue because they feel that they already can not be bought for the price of free stuff, then that is up to them.

Are you expecting every game site to weigh in on the issue?

It's obviously satire but without a serious companion piece it does give the impression that the site views what many see as a serious issue as something of a joke. RPS can post a satirical piece but not report on what that piece is satirising? That really seems off to me.
See above.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Feb 7, 2010
10,049
0
700
Ore-Gone.. not Ory-Gone.
Unlike you, I don't think "integrity" is some exceptional thing. I don't think it's "pure" or "idealistic." It's a decision and a commitment, no more difficult or exceptional than deciding to be good at one's job or faithful to one's friends or whatever. It isn't difficult, nor is it some rarefied domain of angels and saints.

And most games writers say (even the ones who claim they aren't journalists) that they pride themselves on their integrity. So, no, I don't think I'm being at all disingenuous. I'm sorry your life is so filled with cynicism.
Yet most of them probably are. Yet you're asking them to write a story about how they aren't. You are asking someone to expose the perceived boogie man behind the scenes (PR) because you personally think it's maybe changing the stories that are posted.

Yet you've had a few industry types tell you they don't think it is affecting the final product, but then toss pharmaceutical industry stories and advertising effectiveness studies in their face as proof that it could and then toss shit on them about how they have no balls because they fail to address this on their website.

..and yet when I've asked for proof of widespread corruption I get Kotaku un-boxing videos and a bunch of ACIII pieces delivered, interestingly enough right around E3.


I think if you want to know where this stuff does sway opinion, it's the story the person wrote about the girl whose blog glowingly reviewed everything. Yet, there's much more on the line for professionals.

I look through metacritic and fail to see where things are so far off on a game to prove anything. Skyrim PS3? Maybe? I don't see much else.
 
Aug 12, 2007
4,591
0
0
This all just makes me less interested in the entirety of games media, not just reviews. Granted, I haven't been reading all that much to being with, most of my exposure to the press is through podcasts these days (and the odd feature and interview), but it makes me question what the value of games media is.
Indeed. And it's an unfortunate outcome. I mean, yeah, yeah, "it's just games," but clearly games and games writing means more to many of us than "just games."

As someone else said earlier, I'd love to see a Jerry Maguire moment come out of this. It's only been a few days. No site is better poised to take advantage of this than Polygon, who just launched this past week. But it could come from anywhere.

In the meantime, I'm changing my internet reading diet.
 
Jul 25, 2005
5,241
0
0
Isn't that a matter of opinion? If the point was to reinforce that not ALL game journalists can be bought for the price for free stuff, then it is spot on. If RPS chooses to not write about the issue because they feel that they already can not be bought for the price of free stuff, then that is up to them.
Even if the claim was that journalists are being bought with free goodies, how does showing the worst free goodies ever received (and kept) show that the reviewer is unswayed by them?

The point as Rab initially put it was about how comfortably close PR and gaming press have become. This in my opinion is a serious conflict of interests and needs to be addressed.

Are you expecting every game site to weigh in on the issue?
Nope, I doubt that much insight would be brought to the discussion seeing how dismissive a lot of the press have been.

What I do think we should be able to demand is a clear statement of that site's ethical guidelines with respect to dealing with PR, and a justification thereof.
 
Nov 6, 2006
4,455
0
0
I do in fact feel let down and disappointed by the response of the press. And rightly so. They're human beings. This has all been rather disappointing and disillusioning. If it weren't, so many of us wouldn't care so much.
I think my biggest kind of revelation and take away from all of this is that most of what I am reading related to my hobby is just marketing in some form. Some of that is the fault of games writers not creating enough critical distance and too easily allowing PR to dictate the content of their sites. Some of that is my fault for just not being more consciousness about the information I am consuming.

And it also makes me realize that I would like more media related to my hobby that can NOT just be simply categorized as a product being marketed to me. I really don't think that videogames and videogaming culture is simply about product consumption. At least, I want to believe it is more than that. I know for a long time it was. I spent most of my teenage years craving the "next big thing." How do we make it NOT about that?
 
Dec 5, 2008
14,974
0
0
www.neogaf.com
Are you expecting every game site to weigh in on the issue?
Sorry to answer though you didn't direct the question to me. No. I don't expect to every game site to publish their analysis on the issue of PR/games writers relationship. But I can predict that as soon as one of the big ones will, Totilo from Kotaku already hinted in this thread that they could weigh in on the matter next week, then others will follow with their take. It seems that no one wants to take the first step as if they are all in a mexican standoff.
 
Apr 27, 2009
277
0
0
RPS does not get a free pass.

John Walker said this:




Which is patently absurd.

This IS about games and the games industry. How the games industry tries to influence the media that covers their games is not about games?

Seems like something RPS most certainly should be covering.

That fact that RPS is one of the best and most credible gaming sites just makes it all the more disappointing.
Im sure there is no website who are about game journalist. This is a shity argument.
 
Jul 25, 2005
5,241
0
0
Yet most of them probably are. Yet you're asking them to write a story about how they aren't. You are asking someone to expose the perceived boogie man behind the scenes (PR) because you personally think it's maybe changing the stories that are posted.

Yet you've had a few industry types tell you they don't think it is affecting the final product, but then toss pharmaceutical industry stories and advertising effectiveness studies in their face as proof that it could and then toss shit on them about how they have no balls because they fail to address this on their website.
I don't care that much about the sites writing a story about this. I want them to take a fucking stand. No more accepting gifts, junkets, dinners. There is no good reason for it.
 
Jun 7, 2004
85,527
1
0
I look through metacritic and fail to see where things are so far off on a game to prove anything. Skyrim PS3? Maybe? I don't see much else.
Here's a story that isn't even about extra goodies, it's just about how a company can influence reviews through other tactics

In the weeks prior to GTA IV’s release, Rockstar made promises that print and online publications would receive early review code so that they might fully ingest and digest Liberty City in order to deliver mature and balanced opinions on its day of launch.

In reality, this was not the case, with precious few publications getting to spend prolonged time with the game ahead of release. The first review of the game came from the UK’s Official Xbox magazine bearing the worrying caveat “based on unfinished code”.

Eurogamer, wise to the fact promises of AAA title retail code ‘a week before release’ are rarely upheld, arranged to play through the game over a period of days in Rockstar’s offices instead (along with a couple of other UK publications). From speaking to other editors (some of high profile titles) this was not an opportunity offered to all and, when review code failed to turn up the week before release, many were left panicking about how they were going to serve their readers in a timely manner with any integrity.

The reason for the withholding of review code was, according to Rockstar, a result to the game’s leaking onto the internet seven days before its release. Speaking to the company at the time it was claimed that this leak came from an unscrupulous journalist.

As a result, there was a lock down on all review code: everybody would get their copy just one day before the game’s release, and, despite the wonky logic (after all the game had already leaked to those with the capability to play it so why punish the many for the indiscretion of the few) there were to be “no exceptions, no arguments”.

At best then, by the time the game had been played, copy written and subbed ready for the Tuesday morning, most journalists (both in the UK and the US) had played for only a few hours, experiencing just a fraction of the game’s content, a situation testified to by various admissions in professional reviews.

Time Magazine dubbed their piece Grand Theft Auto IV: The 6.24% Review while the Associated Press reviewer, Lou Kesten, admitted to having spent only spent eight hours with the game.

Slate Magazine’s excellent Chris Baker admitted he only had chance to ‘scratch the surface of the game’ going on to say in a comment on N'Gai Croal’s Level Up blog: "I couldn't even attempt to be definitive…it was kinda liberating”.

The BBC noted the phenomenon saying: "Most reviewers were not sent advance copies of the game, and instead had to attend Rockstar offices or sit in booked hotel rooms to play the game,” where Rockstar could keep an eye and some pressure on them. While these few admitted the partial and necessarily subjective nature of their reviews, how many passed off their impressions as being definitive of the whole?
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=18761#.UI3WM8XA8p0
 
May 20, 2007
6,313
0
0
LDN
..and yet when I've asked for proof of widespread corruption I get Kotaku un-boxing videos and a bunch of ACIII pieces delivered, interestingly enough right around E3.
Jeff Gerstmann has publically stated that PR men have told him that they have bought magazine covers in the past, & a journalist has accused a former editor of being directly involved in the sale of review scores, but I guess you missed all the references to that in this thread right?
 
Sep 1, 2005
7,657
0
0
And it also makes me realize that I would like more media related to my hobby that can NOT just be simply categorized as a product being marketed to me. I really don't think that videogames and videogaming culture is simply about product consumption. At least, I want to believe it is more than that.
The communities that spring up around games (most particularly multiplayer games) are indeed more than that.

As for actual interesting articles that are more than simply regurgitated press releases, they do exist - I tend to miss them unless they're good enough for someone to mention on a forum though. It's rare that I hit any gaming news sites directly unless I'm linked to them via that exact method.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Feb 7, 2010
10,049
0
700
Ore-Gone.. not Ory-Gone.
Jeff Gerstmann has publically stated that PR men have told him that they have bought magazine covers in the past, & a journalist has accused a former editor of being directly involved in the sale of review scores, but I guess you missed all the references to that in this thread right?
I honestly don't have a problem with selling covers of magazines.

And where's the story on the editor selling scores? That's what should be posted up as some kind of proof here, not the Kotaku un-boxing meme that one posters keeps popping up every page or 2. I'd like to read it.
 
Nov 6, 2006
4,455
0
0
The communities that spring up around games (most particularly multiplayer games) are indeed more than that.

As for actual interesting articles that are more than simply regurgitated press releases, they do exist - I tend to miss them unless they're good enough for someone to mention on a forum though. It's rare that I hit any gaming news sites directly unless I'm linked to them via that exact method.
Here's another part of the problem, as I see it.

I listen to a lot of gaming podcasts and whenver someone is playing a game that is not one of the hot new releases inevitably somebody gives them shit for how it's old and nobody cares to hear about it anymore. I think this is also true in gaming culture at large.

Now imagine a situition where I just watched or re-watched Network (1976) and wanted to talk about how relevant it is to our current media climate (and it is; anyone who hasn't seen it should do so immediately). And somebody said to me, "Oh man, that movie is nearly four decade old." Or if I just read Lolita or Brothers Karamazov and got a similar response. Only in videogame culture is the cult of the new so prominent that any discussion of older products is largely discouraged and dismissed in this fashion. Older games are far less relevant.

Why is that? My guess is that it is directly related to what mainstream videogaming media is and what it does. It is about marketing the next big thing. When they aren't doing that, they aren't serving their primary purpose.
 

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Feb 7, 2010
10,049
0
700
Ore-Gone.. not Ory-Gone.
Here's another part of the problem, as I see it.

I listen to a lot of gaming podcasts and whenver someone is playing a game that is not one of the hot new releases inevitably somebody gives them shit for how it's old and nobody cares to hear about it anymore. I think this is also true in gaming culture at large.

Now imagine a situition where I just watched or re-watched Network (1976) and wanted to talk about how relevant it is to our current media climate (and it is). And somebody said to me, "Oh man, that move is nearly a decade old." Or if I just read Lolita or Brothers Karamazov. Only in videogame culture is the cult of the new so prominent that any discussion of older products is largely discouraged and dismissed in this fashion.

Why is that? My guess is that it is directly related to what mainstream videogaming media is and what it does. It is about marketing the next big thing. When they aren't doing that, they aren't serving their primary purpose.
I dunno, post up a Network OT in off-topic and see how many pages you get.

The discussion of older games is quite prominent on GAF, and nostalgic stories on websites are quite common.
 
Feb 27, 2010
6,541
0
0
Ireland
RPS does not get a free pass.

John Walker said this:




Which is patently absurd.

This IS about games and the games industry. How the games industry tries to influence the media that covers their games is not about games?

Seems like something RPS most certainly should be covering.

That fact that RPS is one of the best and most credible gaming sites just makes it all the more disappointing.
terrible argument from John there, sports sites absolutely cover issues relating to commentators and journalists in that area, like the Jemele Hill or Andy Gray incidents
 
Dec 12, 2006
2,579
0
880
...but it makes me question what the value of games media is.
This is the elephant in the room and I believe one of the main reasons why the larger sites are avoiding commentating on the issue.

Pretty much it boils down to the fact that games sites are offering an opinion and little else of value.

But if you can't trust their opinions what use are they?

That's not an idea that owners of the websites want to be planting in their readers' minds...
 
Sep 1, 2005
7,657
0
0
Here's another part of the problem, as I see it.

I listen to a lot of gaming podcasts and whenver someone is playing a game that is not one of the hot new releases inevitably somebody gives them shit for how it's old and nobody cares to hear about it anymore. I think this is also true in gaming culture at large.

Why is that? My guess is that it is directly related to what mainstream videogaming media is and what it does. It is about marketing the next big thing. When they aren't doing that, they aren't serving their primary purpose.
Because the podcasters are dense? :V

I don't listen to them, I found them all irritating as hell, so uh... I can't really speak to that.

I pull out old, great games every now and then to replay because they are still great. I recommend them to new gamers who have never touched them. It's rare that I hear back anything but 'that was great!' or at worst 'not my kind of game'. Look at the old game love threads here and elsewhere on the net, they get plenty of respect from gamers.

And yes, it's very easy to get into a mindset of the next greatest thing, you can plan out a holiday schedule that has a new big release hitting every week or two for three months straight. That barely gives you time to breath and enjoy any game, much less if you have to actually play and preview/review a shitload of other games in that same timespan.

GAF has plenty of threads that last a good long time, and I don't think there's anything unhealthy in being curious about what is awesome and coming around the corner.

(I also think it is fucking hilarious when people get mad at pseudo sequels that churn the same formula when it's a really good formula, while at the same time impaling completely new ideas for not being enough like some other game. Schizophrenia is a gamer mandate.)
 
Nov 6, 2006
4,455
0
0
I dunno, post up a Network OT in off-topic and see how many pages you get.

The discussion of older games is quite prominent on GAF, and nostalgic stories on websites are quite common.
I can guarantee you if I went to a film enthusiast site there would be a lot of discussion of it. Have you ever been around film students and film enthusiasts, for example? They LOVE talking about old films.

As to your second point, yes on community message boards, to a smaller degree. Never as much interest as whatever the current next new hotness is, but they are given more attention than they used to be given and that is encouraging. But as far as mainstream sites go, it's a constant focus in the other direction. Which is simply to say, it is an advertisement for the next new thing.
 
Aug 1, 2009
3,319
0
0
www.neogaf.com
In light of this, what would your reaction have been to someone who said, "Yeah, yeah, whatever. Look, just give me the facts and knock off the spin. I'll give you guys a fair shake, but I don't need to hear this stuff."
Since that kind of directness is uncommon, I would be taken aback a bit, but I wouldn't have had any problem giving them the information they needed and moving on. It's definitely more pleasant to say "this product has these specifications and features" than to get into the elongated "this product is perfectly designed for anyone living the following lifestyle..." if the person I'm communicating with is already interested in covering it. I would have failed at my job to increase our company's exposure if I would have acted in a way that made people want to avoid working with me.
 
May 19, 2010
44,040
0
645

NervousXtian

Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Feb 7, 2010
10,049
0
700
Ore-Gone.. not Ory-Gone.
I can guarantee you if I went to a film enthusiast site there would be a lot of discussion of it. Have you ever been around film students and film enthusiasts, for example? They LOVE talking about old films.
I used to post quite a bit on the CHUD forums years ago, so yes I do.

Closest to the OT on CHUD has 21 replies.
 
May 19, 2010
44,040
0
645
I honestly don't have a problem with selling covers of magazines.

And where's the story on the editor selling scores? That's what should be posted up as some kind of proof here, not the Kotaku un-boxing meme that one posters keeps popping up every page or 2. I'd like to read it.
Why? Do you write about games for a living?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.