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

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem is the second anyone insults a womans appearance it turns into that sort of argument. Where people are automatically claiming "misogyny, patriarchy". You still are ignoring what I said and automatically assuming we're sexist.
I'm not assuming anything. I'm asking, for this entire line of conversation to please move on. Please. Please. Sexism has nothing to do with this story, and I really don't want to see another thread get covered by it. This isn't just to you, it's also to the dog pile of people that jumped on the guy right out the gate instead of just moving on. I'm also saying it to myself.
 
I'd rather ask this: What does her appearance have to do with all this?
Nothing nor am i defending it. But, it was said and it was tame, no need to dogpile. I don't care if she's a male or female, but, I do care when comments about misogyny get thrown around just because she's a woman. The idea that a woman can not be strong and has to be protected from the angry hordes of internet nerds is insulting.

The point is he's not a sexist for insulting her appearance.

Now I'm ending this. Reply to me and we could take it to PMs.
 
No, it's still disgusting and horrific. Especially when they go on an dreview games that their friends work on without disclosing (like any Harmonix or Double Fine game).

Also funny how they don't review Dance Central 3 because it's a bad game, but felt fine giving great scores to DC1 and 2. Why? Because their friends work at Harmonix who are currently dieing right now.
Giantbomb elected not to review Bastion because of their involvement in the ongoing development diary coverage they had on the site. Full disclosure.


Jeff Gerstmann did not review Dance Central 3 because he couldn't get it to work under optimal conditions at his home and he would be out of town for the week which would affect a timely review so he declined to critique it for the site. This was all talked about on this weeks Bombcast.


Or maybe he is a big fat liar, whatever fuels your 'horrific disgust' about a videogame website where the writers happen to know most of the other people in the industry from over the years. Follow the money.
 

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
This is quite the juicy story here. I'm angered in a way. It's embarrassing to see this display.

I salute those who stand up for integrity and not try to build a smoke and mirrors facade trying to hide their own.
 

Casimir

Unconfirmed Member
What was wrong with the way he wrote the article?
It violated the cardinal rule of game journalists. That is it called out the BS actions/words of a 'journalist' without refocusing the issue to make it look like the actions of the journalist were kosher.

As usual the journalists have started to circle their wagons to defend themselves from the totally biased and uninformed 'forum posters' and non-conforming journalists. Though this time they can't use public twitter to ego-stroke each other and arrogantly dismiss all criticism as irrelevant and uninformed. The obvious response is really only for when they do something really stupid like mistake a Photoshop for upcoming game confirmation.


As much as they should never have been jailed, they were jailed for misrepresenting the risk, not of actually failing to predict a quake. There is a difference.
They were members of the national committee on major risks, so communicating and quantifying the risks was what they were being paid to do.
They were basically like the scientists in B-Movie disaster movies who don't believe the hero that the local volcano etc is gonna explode.
Misrepresenting the risk of an unpredictable event? This is a town that sits right above a major fault line and has frequent tremors.

"In the week before the earthquake struck, the group told the public that the high incidence of smaller earthquakes were not necessarily precursors of a larger quake. They did, however, also mention that earthquakes were unpredictable, and that building codes in the area needed to be adjusted to provide better seismic safety."

What exactly were the scientists misrepresenting? Is their due diligence personally going door-to-door and physically removing all the residents? The only reason a lot of people died was because the local government officials didn't force retrofitting of the older buildings. The scientists are scapegoats to placate the angry mob.

/sorry for the tangent, this verdict is as moronic as believing the female body automatically aborts rape babies.
 
I thought this was the best article that I've read on EuroGamer in a very long time.

There was nothing in the article was a revelation but the meltdown in the comments section from those mentioned in the article was delicious.
 
So is the problem that this Laura Wainwright character is a shill, or that someone called her out for being a shill?

Because it sounds like the latter is a bigger deal than the former in the clubby game journo world. This makes total sense, not to make it political, but you clearly see this same dynamic amongst crooks in government, finance, etc. the problem isn't that guy X is a crook, it's that people calling him a crook are besmirching his good name.
The problem yesterday was is that she was not even aware of how much of a shill they stuff she does makes her look, but then today someone found a bunch of shady "HOW AWESOME IS YOUR SE GAME?" interviews and a job profile that says she worked on Square Enix. So basically she complained about being criticized, forced in some way Eurogamer to edit the article, gain negative attention and then the internet happened.

 
Reminds me of the situation where Future Publishing pulled a Paul "Mr.Biffo" Rose column over Phil Harrison's conduct at a Marrilion concert over a Sony Legal threat. Once Sony lawyers came in, Future just killed it. Rose pretty much quit on the games industry after that.
What?? Is this true?


They were critical of journalism way back when, and never really claimed the journalism title but it's sad that so many ex-1up guys now work in the industry. When is the last time a sports writer got hired to work in the front office of a professional baseball team?
A former SI journalist is now Head of Communications for Liverpool FC.

If only someone would look into the sorry state that the US Games press is also. THe whole buddy buddy thing with journos and devs is disgusting. GiantBomb sickens me all the time because of this.
GiantBomb are up front about it though, I know they are good friends with various developers & so I am free to take their opinions with a pinch of salt, did Laurens readership know she was (allegedly) taking SE money while she was reviewing SE games?
 
Giantbomb elected not to review Bastion because of their involvement in the ongoing development diary coverage they had on the site. Full disclosure.


Jeff Gerstmann did not review Dance Central 3 because he couldn't get it to work under optimal conditions at his home and he would be out of town for the week which would affect a timely review so he declined to critique it for the site. This was all talked about on this weeks Bombcast.


Or maybe he is a big fat liar, whatever fuels your 'horrific disgust' about a videogame website where the writers happen to know most of the other people in the industry from over the years. Follow the money.
seems to me youre just repeating the kool aid and being a sheep like what this article challenges you as. Good job lad.
 
Looks like no one I actually like reading stuff from is on that list. Phew.
Worth pointing out the first on that list is Martin Gaston who did so after the competition had closed and the prizes allotted as a piss-take on everybody else who entered. He does this sort of stuff on Twitter pretty often but it looks out of context here. I know he doesn't care about his image enough to bother pointing this out himself, so I feel I should!
 

Archaix

Drunky McMurder
Giantbomb elected not to review Bastion because of their involvement in the ongoing development diary coverage they had on the site. Full disclosure.


Jeff Gerstmann did not review Dance Central 3 because he couldn't get it to work under optimal conditions at his home and he would be out of town for the week which would affect a timely review so he declined to critique it for the site. This was all talked about on this weeks Bombcast.


Or maybe he is a big fat liar, whatever fuels your horrific disgust about a website about videogames. Follow the money.

They've been expressing a lot of confusion over how to review Kinect games. Brad gave Fable a much higher score than he seemed to judge the game in writing or on video/podcast, forgiving it for the fact that it was completely broken, because the Kinect itself is completely broken. I think that's an awful way to review games, and personally would rather see them abandon Kinect reviews altogether than pretend that they work.
 
Longtime Chicago Tribune reporter Sam Smith was hired to write the Chicago Bulls team blog a few years ago. But he was hardly angling for the job. Smith is best known for writing "The Jordan Rules," which is a fairly critical book about the early years of Jordan's career.
I assume this is rare though. I know all of those French New Wave critics actually turned the film industry on it's head and actually became directors. I actually feel bad for some of the people involved here because I personally don't take things that seriously. I think if you are in a position of power where you really have a voice that is taken seriously, you should maybe worry about things like conflict of interest. Giant Bomb being friendly with John Drake and Double Fine employees means nothing to me.
 

Oldschoolgamer

The physical form of blasphemy
So, my question is, how do you name drop people, then develop a conscious about it two paragraphs later? Why not go after the really crooked ones, if you have the evidence to do so?
 
In discussing 1Up, it also can't be forgotten that it was a sinking ship for about a year, so I think a lot of people were taking their lifeboats when they could.

Doesn't remove the image of impropriety, however.
How long ago are we talking? Because I remember this shit:





And didn't that Shane guy go on to become a Sony PR shill or something?
 
That list should go even further and have the site/mag they work for next to the name.
There's a corollary to this that I'm not sure I like; the idea that you have to be so squeaky-clean professionally that it affects how you conduct your private business. It's a tricky one, and I keep wavering on it when I think through the various ramifications, but ultimately: I don't think people should lose the right to go home and leave work behind, figuratively.

That said, I'd say that part of the issue here is Twitter accounts conflating business work and personal stuff.
 
They've been expressing a lot of confusion over how to review Kinect games. Brad gave Fable a much higher score than he seemed to judge the game, forgiving it for the fact that it was completely broken, because the Kinect itself is completely broken. I think that's an awful way to review games, and personally would rather see them abandon Kinect reviews altogether than pretend that they work.
Why do you even care? Are you going to buy Fable The Journey? The entire industry is guilty of using the fucked up 7-10 scale.
 
So is the problem that this Laura Wainwright character is a shill, or that someone called her out for being a shill?
Nether really. She was used as an example of actions that could make the public question integrity. The article didn't say "hey take a look at this shill, omg" or "this person has no integrity because of this". It pointed out recent actions of 2 "journalists" who could be used as an example of why the public may question the system behind it all. The writer went on to explain that the two he mentioned probably had no connections to anything PR.
 
I don't think Dave threatened to sue EG as she supposedly did. I don't think they work for the same company either do they? Is VG247 part of the MCV "network" or whatever? To be honest, Dave has always seemed like a nice guy, and he gives away quite a lot of stuff on his Twitter, presumably the PR stuff he gets given - i.e. he donated his PS3 from this to the sick kids charity.

That doesn't get away from sending the advertising tweet of course, but I don't think he's made anything like as much of a fuss over the situation as Wainwright did. In fact, looking at his Twitter he seems to have realised his mistake and be quite apologetic about it.
Being shamed into donating the PS3 is hardly deserving of respect
 
AFAIK the MCV said they didn't start a lawsuit. I don't think they denied threatening Eurogamer with a lawsuit, however.
They deny it conclusively. So, they're lying, Rab tweet is on the assumption that there was a legal threat but there was none, so Eurogamer lied to Rab to save face, or the legal threat was from another source.

Ben Parfitt ‏@BenParfitt
@BenKuchera @Michael_French Intent at no stage threatened legal action
 
Just because you pretend GiantBomb are your "friends over the internet" doesn't mean you have to white knight them. What they do is shady and disgusting. It works for them but it is.
 
Rab Florence tweeted that there were threats of legal action, CVM guy tweeted there weren't any from their part. So the threat of legal action was from other involved parties in that article (Geoff, Dave Cook, Doritos, Mountain Dew, Microsoft) or, someone is lying or talking about hearsay. This is a complete mess now.
It's worth pointing out that "the threat of legal action" doesn't *necessarily* mean that a threat was made; a bit like "going to Kenya gives the threat of being eaten by lions" doesn't necessarily *mean* that there's a lion staring at you and licking its lips.

Holy hell, that's a shitty analogy.


Edit: Rereading it, though, the mention of 'bad guys' certainly suggests that there actually was a direct threat made.
 
Geoff Keighley is the Billy Bush of video games. Ive always saw him as a hype man for all games. People getting pissed that hes standing next to Halo Doritos is kinda ridiculous. Hes been doing this kind of stuff since 2005.
 
Nether really. She was used as an example of actions that could make the public question integrity. The article didn't say "hey take a look at this shill, omg" or "this person has no integrity because of this". It pointed out recent actions of 2 "journalists" who could be used as an example of why the public may question the system behind it all. The writer went on to explain that the two he mentioned probably had no connections to anything PR.
Then one of the people mentioned sent a legal challenge, Eurogamer folded like a pack of cards, Rob Florence resigned (cue shitstorm), and then the internet found that the complainer in question actually claims to be employed by Square Enix.
 
So, my question is, how do you name drop people, then develop a conscious about it two paragraphs later? Why not go after the really crooked ones, if you have the evidence to do so?
Because, as I think has been mentioned before, he wasn't name dropping these two people as corporate shills. Refer to my last post for a more full explanation. He didn't namedrop anyone like that. That wasn't the point of the article. It wasn't an attack on Geoff, Cook, or Wainwright.
 
There's a special circle of hell reserved for the whiny sods who cry for their lawyer whenever someone says anything remotely damning about them.

If lawyers weren't involved, then really, why wouldn't Eurogamer stick to their guns? This is a clusterfuck. :/
 

Archaix

Drunky McMurder
Why do you even care? Are you going to buy Fable The Journey? The entire industry is guilty of using the fucked up 7-10 scale.
Giant Bomb doesn't use the fucked up 7-10 scale, though. And they generally point out faults and review games with internal consistancy. Brad seemed pretty harsh on his experience with this game andthen gave it 3 stars with the reasoning being essentially "If the Kinect weren't broken and unreliable, this would be a decent game." I'm saying I agree with their decision to not review Dance Central 3 if the review would have made the same concessions. Why publish a review that pretends the game works when it just doesn't reliably?
 
Giantbomb elected not to review Bastion because of their involvement in the ongoing development diary coverage they had on the site. Full disclosure.


Jeff Gerstmann did not review Dance Central 3 because he couldn't get it to work under optimal conditions at his home and he would be out of town for the week which would affect a timely review so he declined to critique it for the site. This was all talked about on this weeks Bombcast.


Or maybe he is a big fat liar, whatever fuels your 'horrific disgust' about a videogame website where the writers happen to know most of the other people in the industry from over the years. Follow the money.
Bastion won a bunch of GOTY awards though.
 
seems to me youre just repeating the kool aid and being a sheep like what this article challenges you as. Good job lad.
It's impossible to take you seriously if you call people sheeps for coming up with a legit response to your accusations that doesn't agree with you.

You made an argument, he pointed out how you are wrong and all hou have left is to call people names.
 
Geoff Keighley is the Billy Bush of video games. Ive always saw him as a hype man for all games. People getting pissed that hes standing next to Halo Doritos is kinda ridiculous. Hes been doing this kind of stuff since 2005.
I'm just glad that he took time to point out that MTN DEW were bringing back their Citrus Cherry flavour Game Fuel, from now on I will go to Geoff for all my MTN DEW news.
 
Giant Bomb doesn't use the fucked up 7-10 scale, though. And they generally point out faults and review games with internal consistancy. Brad seemed pretty harsh on his experience with this game andthen gave it 3 stars with the reasoning being essentially "If the Kinect weren't broken and unreliable, this would be a decent game." I'm saying I agree with their decision to not review Dance Central 3 if the review would have made the same concessions. Why publish a review that pretends the game works when it just doesn't reliably?
The problem comes in that Harmonix are having a really hard time right now and are laying people off their friends, so it makes it super shady that theyre not reviewing the game as they possibly don't want to put the well deserved deathknell in.
 
Well the problem with that is that these costs are only awarded once the case is done

and the lawyers you hire aren't going to wait for a year or however long for you to pay them while the case is ongoing, so you have to pay and then wait for the court or other party to reimburse you (which can also take ages or be whittled down on any appeal).

So by the time you actually get the money, the damage may have already been done.
I meant in the cases of *frivolous* law suits only, and whatever that entails (Have to describe the issue in detail in the courts, so it should be hard to present, in detail, a frivolous suit like something else to professionals.) and since a lot of suits are probably bogus/frivolous, the plaintiff should have to meet an extremely high standard of reason and logic in order to succeed.

The plaintiff should pay to sue someone in such cases -- it shouldn't be an easy process in frivolous cases, or anything related to copyright or artistic license unless there is empirical proof. And companies should have to pay regardless if they want to take a private person to court.

Basically, it shouldn't be so easy to sue someone -- if you really think that you are owed a lot of money from a person, then you should be able to front that money to support that claim. If you aren't sure, then you obviously shouldn't be suing.

Again, I'm talking about frivolous suits only.

But, I assume (With very little knowledge about the law, let alone English laws.) that this aspect of the courts system is, like the other systems and laws, held back by the variables all the other laws produce -- some laws have been changed from time to time, some haven't. I doubt the possible variables of the original laws were perfect as a whole, but at this point it's just a massive, random collection of laws that make sense in segments. Some are updated, some are not, some are forgotten -- this will obviously result in a conflict. But it doesn't seem like any country is interested in updating them all, as a whole.
 
Just because you pretend GiantBomb are your "friends over the internet" doesn't mean you have to white knight them. What they do is shady and disgusting. It works for them but it is.
I really just don't take video games that seriously. I listen to a funny podcast once a week about guys playing videogames. I really wish Giant Bomb would just stop doing reviews altogether.

The problem comes in that Harmonix are having a really hard time right now and are laying people off their friends, so it makes it super shady that theyre not reviewing the game as they possibly don't want to put the well deserved deathknell in.
Occam's razor.
 
Geoff Keighley is the Billy Bush of video games. Ive always saw him as a hype man for all games. People getting pissed that hes standing next to Halo Doritos is kinda ridiculous. Hes been doing this kind of stuff since 2005.
Honestly reminds me a bit of Jonathan Ross in the film world. Jonathan Ross hosted a film television show on the BBC, talked a lot about films, was a prominent figure I guess in the British cinema media coverage. But he's just a personality, you'd never really look to him for the cutting insights, the harsh reviews, because the BBC also had (and still has) Mark Kermode. Dunno who the gaming world's Mark Kermode is though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.