Support NeoGAF

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

God Hand is still shit.

wow what a hot take

here's your worst opinion award

 

[UnluckyKate]

But how frequently do these "gift baskets" happen? The most egregious was probably the Watch Dogs scandal, and those tablets would only go for a few hundred, and not everyone from every publication would even be there to receive those.

As an individual you'd probably pull in a few extra hundred a month (at most), but if you're working in any specialized profession, you're definitely out-grossing an enthusiast game reviewer.

I just think the notion that game reviewers are "wealthy" by any stretch of the imagination seems pretty fantastical.

once a month and more with busy period we would recieve press kit of game worth 100+ euros. Also, it's both a shit life playing shit games, but press tours were nice and food is always provided so you can always be outside every night of the week and have your dinner on the back of an editor trying to get a paper from you at an event.

I lasted a year. Moved on. Everyone was nice in front of the PR girls, but stabbing in the back in the papers the morning after. They didnt have balls to say " no your demo is shit " but they all took gifts, and tours and food.

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I wrote reviews for G4TV.com for awhile. I generally only reviewed games I was interested in...only once did they kind of hand me a game I wasn't looking forward to, and I actually ended up loving it (Infamous 2).

The only game I couldn't finish for the review was The Last Story, which admittedly isn't even that long, but I had a lot of stuff going on at the time. Probably got around two thirds of the way through, but I felt it was probably enough to review.

I *did* finish Xenoblade: Chronicles, though. Bam! Sixty six hours.

I no longer do RPGs for review. The time/payment ratio just super isn't worth it and I think rushing through it, or stressing myself to finish it, diminishes my enjoyment of the game. So I'd probably be unable to give a good review and I lost out on enjoyment of that game.

That's entirely just me, though.

 

[adarker]

It's a tough job but the big checks from publishers make it all worth it

Damn, if only that were true.

 

[pr0cs]

Pretty much any job that involves a hobby has the fun sucked out of it if you HAVE to do it

 

[More_Badass]

I write about games as a hobby and a part-time job. It's great. Then again, I only write about indies, so I don't have that pressure or need to worry about deadlines

But yeah, writing about games and spreading the word on great games is a passion of mine, so it never feels like work

 

[KidB]

When I was younger I used to think of it as the coolest job ever, but it seems like gaming would become a chore when you have to play so many games, including bad ones and being on a deadline, which would hamper the enjoyment of a good lengthy game.

 

[Goro Majima]

Even working somewhere like Giantbomb sounds pretty miserable most of the time. They typically just play a bunch of video games while on vacation to get caught up.

It's also why I never got on the "Jeff Gerstmann hates everything" bandwagon since I imagine getting super excited about games when it's your job like that must be kinda hard.

 

[matrixman92]

I feel like the hardest part would be to keep track of what scores you give to what. I could see getting called out a lot for not being consistent in scoring.

It's always something I wanted to get into, but I can't even fathom how to get started

 

[Catvoca]

This thread shows what I assume is the worst part about being a game reviewer - A bunch of people saying you're not doing a real job, assuming that you get paid a bunch of money when you're skating by, assuming you've been paid by big publishers to give their game a good score, thinking you gave a game a bad score just for "clicks", saying your a hack/biased/SJW/etc. because you didn't like a game they like.

I mean these people just love games and write about them, i don't know if it's jealousy or what that makes people treat em' like shit but that seems like it would be the hardest part about covering games.

 

[Warxard]

While I think IGN was too harsh, and the game isn't "shit", it had major problems. The game was more a "proof of concept" than anything else. Don't understand why God Hand is used as an example of reviewers being wrong when a lot of the criticism was on the mark.

I would love a really refined game built on the base combat system with more freedom of movement/camera.

I can praise it as a proof of concept sure, but with the myriad of combat design flaws, mechanics being half assed when used in application to the actual game, fucking awful camera and the game lacking any sort of visual variety makes it for me one of the worst PS2 games of all time.

if it had a sequel it'd be amazing though.

Edgy

wow what a hot take

here's your worst opinion award

Wow, I didn't know I was on /v/.

 

[SillyEskimo]

I believe virtually anyone can review video games, movies, and TV shows.

 

[Peltz]

I believe virtually anyone can review video games, movies, and TV shows.

Yes, anyone can do it. But some reviewers are a lot more skilled than others.

 

[More_Badass]

I believe virtually anyone can review video games, movies, and TV shows.

Unless you have some actual experience or knowledge of game dev, there's nothing separating a person writing for a site and someone sharing their impressions on GAF besides a paycheck and writing talent

They're still just people like you or me. Anyone can review games if they can write well enough

 

[shadowfall]

I was told that being games reviewer/journalist is not a lucrative career. As a career it would be hard for me. But as other poster said, if I played games for a living, I might get bored of it quickly.

 

[More_Badass]

I was told that being games reviewer/journalist is not a lucrative career. As a career it would be hard for me. But as other poster said, if I played games for a living, I might get bored of it quickly.

It's not. I'm lucky since I'm college and living off campus, so it's a nice bit of extra cash on the side.

But if you want to make a sizable amount, you need to write for multiple sites at a time.

 

[Professor Beef]

I can praise it as a proof of concept sure, but with the myriad of combat design flaws, mechanics being half assed when used in application to the actual game, fucking awful camera and the game lacking any sort of visual variety makes it for me one of the worst PS2 games of all time.

if it had a sequel it'd be amazing though.

This the cold, hard, truth that nobody wants to admit about God Hand. If a criticism shows up, its always "spankings and gorilla suits tho"

 

[Psychoward]

I can praise it as a proof of concept sure, but with the myriad of combat design flaws, mechanics being half assed when used in application to the actual game, fucking awful camera and the game lacking any sort of visual variety makes it for me one of the worst PS2 games of all time.

if it had a sequel it'd be amazing though.





Wow, I didn't know I was on /v/.

Your original post read like a /v/ post so not sure what you're trying to say here bud.

 

[Warxard]

This the cold, hard, truth that nobody wants to admit about God Hand. If a criticism shows up, its always "spankings and gorilla suits tho"

And these are the same people that have the nerve to compare God Hand, essentially an unfinished game to other, amazing action games like DMC1/3/4/DmC, NGB, Bayo etc.

But i've seen worse.

--

But, that's a different discussion for a different day,

 

[A Link to the Past]

I did it at the behest of a friend who was working for a mildly big website (can't remember what it is), but I ultimately quit because it was tiresome to spend half of my writing time there on re-writing PR statements.

 

[superNESjoe]

I believe virtually anyone can review video games, movies, and TV shows.

I used to review games and met a lot of smaller enthusiast press while doing it. I can assure you that not everyone has the same ability to articulate their thoughts or express opinions in a generally "neutral" manner.

I met quite a few people who's opinions led you to believe something was either the second coming of Christ, or so offensively terrible it made them violently ill. No in between, and very little ability to give you an in depth analysis of why they felt that way.

Yes, there is a difference between a "professional" critic, and a blogger/every day forum poster. Honestly, the folks I've run into that fancy themselves hardcore video game experts tend to be the worst at the job.

 

[kavanf1]

I couldn’t be a professional reviewer because I'm too selective about what I play. I couldn't be bothered playing a game I wasn't into just to get a review written.

Similar sentiment: I am sure that if I became a QA game tester, it would destroy my enjoyment of them.

Anybody here ever been a QA tester, btw?

I worked in QA for a couple of years, not in video games mind you. It's repetitive, dull work, the main purpose of which is to find issues and report on them so they can be fixed and don't end up in the end product. It's dull because you don't get to be creative in any way, you're basically following a checklist of stuff without ever seeing the overall end result. And you do the same thing again and again and again...

It's good experience to get but I definitely couldn't make a career of it.

 

[Freshmaker]

There' s no such thing as a "professional" Game Reviewer. That's the media making you to believe that reviewing games is a professional work.

Uh...

If someone gets paid to review games, there you go. They're doing it professionally.

Might as well claim there are no professional writers since they are all below your standards with their sharp paragraphs.

 

[Mechazawa]

And these are the same people that have the nerve to compare God Hand, essentially an unfinished game to other, amazing action games like DMC1/3/4/DmC, NGB, Bayo etc.

Calling God Hand unfinished in the same breadth as DMC4.

Mother.

Fuckin'.

Lol.

Don't besmirch Mikami's Magnum Opus.

 

[MMaRsu]

Haha lol I would agree. Boo that man for sure. To speak such ill of the God Hand

 

[DoublePayje]

This thread shows what I assume is the worst part about being a game reviewer - A bunch of people saying you're not doing a real job, assuming that you get paid a bunch of money when you're skating by, assuming you've been paid by big publishers to give their game a good score, thinking you gave a game a bad score just for "clicks", saying your a hack/biased/SJW/etc. because you didn't like a game they like.

I mean these people just love games and write about them, i don't know if it's jealousy or what that makes people treat em' like shit but that seems like it would be the hardest part about covering games.

I am an active games journalist/reviewer and yes, this is the hardest part.

Everyone in the office (we are one of the largest mags in business) has a different way of dealing with that. Some start side projects to get their joy/fans out of that (youtubers/streamers), some lose the love and don't invest anything more than their eight hours a day and others seek the better parts of the community. I myself play with a group of readers paradox hardcore strategy games.

I was told that being games reviewer/journalist is not a lucrative career. As a career it would be hard for me. But as other poster said, if I played games for a living, I might get bored of it quickly.

It pays absolutly shitty. If i have to leave my current mag i would search for a different job. The payment by smaller publications are just not worth it, even if you love the job.

 

[SilentRob]

you don't make a lot, but TONS of side shit you get and can sell for tons of bucks.

You have no idea how better press kit of games are compared to collectors.

Sold some for 300+ euros back then. People are crazy to buy these shit for these price. But hey.

I'm sorry but you had a terrible editor-in-chief in that case because it's his job to keep you from doing exactly what you did. If you were working for any of the "bigger" video game websites and pulled something like that you would be fired, no questions asked. That stuff get's catalogued and is accounted for in a proper editorial team, keeping you from basically getting paid by publishers by selling their stuff, if they even accept these press kits at all.

Also, worth noting:

"Video Game Reviewer" doesn't really exist anymore on a big scale. Sure, there are a few people whose sole job it is to review games in a few of the biggest publications, but they few and far between. If you work in gaming journalism today you also have to do stuff like produce, cut and/or host video content, write news, put out Evergreen/SEO-articles, write Specials, columns - you are basically involved in the whole process. Of course it always depends on the publication what you are doing specifically, but even in video game journalism actually reviewing video games is only one part of the job 99% of the time.

Also, it pays like shit. That's just something you have to come to terms with if you want to work in this industry.

 

[Freeman76]

That's what happens when you do something you love for a living: that thing becomes a job. And jobs aren't fun every day.

Even the coolest jobs become a grind eventually.

I used to feel that way when i was a 4 colour press minder, now i do counselling for a living it hasnt felt that way

 

[UnluckyKate]

I'm sorry but you had a terrible editor-in-chief in that case because it's his job to keep you from doing exactly what you did. If you were working for any of the "bigger" video game websites and pulled something like that you would be fired, no questions asked. That stuff get's catalogued and is accounted for in a proper editorial team, keeping you from basically getting paid by publishers by selling their stuff.

we weren't paid. we got tons of gifts in form of press kits. we saw them on ebays after some weeks or when the game were released. we were selling them because they were given to us and we did review / preview games.

I never felt bad about it. Some press kit were 100x better, better quality than some collector editions. Some fans wanted them. We didn't have any use of them, they were taking shit ton of space. We sold them. I called many times the PR, saying their pr kits were 100x betters all answerd : we know, but they also cost more and are harder to mass produce, hence, we can't make a lot and cant mass market them

 

[superNESjoe]

you don't make a lot, but TONS of side shit you get and can sell for tons of bucks.

You have no idea how better press kit of games are compared to collectors.

Sold some for 300+ euros back then. People are crazy to buy these shit for these price. But hey.

At any major publication this would've been a reason to get fired. Hell, even at my small publication I would have fired you.

Edit: I see you say you weren't paid. They should have been denied or returned if you didn't want them. I suppose if your boss didn't care then who am I to disagree though.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

That's what happens when you do something you love for a living: that thing becomes a job. And jobs aren't fun every day.

Even the coolest jobs become a grind eventually.

This post is accurate.

But yea, as a fan of video games, it would not be fun to play stuff to a deadline. While playing at your own pace, you find out that some games were designed to be played a certain way, whether that is to 100% individual levels/stages, play them in a certain order, acquire certain power ups, do certain side-quests, etc. Trying to rush through all that would quickly become a chore.

 

[Pinko Marx]

This in my eyes is a huge problem when it comes to reviewing games. It makes it so that certain types of games are easier to review and thus are prone to higher scores or, at least, scores that are more indicative of the product. AAA games are relatively short, easy to get into, and provide lots of spectacle and set pieces that are more likely to leave an impression on your average, jaded games journo.

 

[Led_Zeppelin]

A lot of reviewers get around this by not actually finishing the games.

Or by beating games on the most easy difficulty settings.

 

[UnluckyKate]

At any major publication this would've been a reason to get fired. Hell, even at my small publication I would have fired you.

Edit: I see you say you weren't paid. They should have been denied or returned if you didn't want them. I suppose if your boss didn't care then who am I to disagree though.

Boss didn't care. Other employee getting paid benetif the same perks. I talk about it with the boss " what do you guys do with all the crap with get everyday in the mail ? " He said, we give them to kids, nefew, neigbors, sometimes when it's a nice package, or a nice press kit, we sell them on ebay. "

So I asked if the PR were okay with that. He told me most other publications did that anyway. It's part of the game, they don't care what you do with the material as long as you give the their game coverage "

 

[SilentRob]

This in my eyes is a huge problem when it comes to reviewing games. It makes it so that certain types of games are easier to review and thus are prone to higher scores or, at least, scores that are more indicative of the product. AAA games are relatively short, easy to get into, and provide lots of spectacle and set pieces that are more likely to leave an impression on your average, jaded games journo.

The numbers tell a different story. According to Metacritic the best rated games of 2015 were:

GTA 5
Metal Gear Solid V
Witcher 3
Undertale
Journey
Bloodborne

4 out of 6 of these games are open-world to some degree and take upwards of 30 hours to complete. THe other two and small indie games, far removed from tpyical AAA-fodder. Meanwhile two of the biggest short games with a focus on spectacle and set pieces got good but not amazing scores: Black Ops 3 & Halo 5.

You can check yourself, most of the top rated games of 2015 were big, big games that take dozens of hours to complete. Divinity: Original Sin, The Taken King, Fallout 4, Trails in the Sky, the list goes on and on.

Boss didn't care. Other employee getting paid benetif the same perks. I talk about it with the boss " what do you guys do with all the crap with get everyday in the mail ? " He said, we give them to kids, nefew, neigbors, sometimes when it's a nice package, or a nice press kit, we sell them on ebay. "

So I asked if the PR were okay with that. He told me most other publications did that anyway. It's part of the game, they don't care what you do with the material as long as you give the their game coverage "

Your boss is terrible at his job. Also, I think we have to point out the difference here. If you are not getting paid you write game reviews as a hobby - this is not the same as working full time as part of an editorial team.

 

[MC Safety]

Boss didn't care. Other employee getting paid benetif the same perks. I talk about it with the boss " what do you guys do with all the crap with get everyday in the mail ? " He said, we give them to kids, nefew, neigbors, sometimes when it's a nice package, or a nice press kit, we sell them on ebay. "

So I asked if the PR were okay with that. He told me most other publications did that anyway. It's part of the game, they don't care what you do with the material as long as you give the their game coverage "

Yeah, that kind of stuff is all-too-common. The better publications out there keep things above board.

But I know "professionals" who took the tchtochke and, after saying thank you, gleefully proclaimed it was going on Ebay.

 

[Alebrije]

"professional"

This. There Is not such a thing as a professional game reviewer , specially when lots of reviews come from people that just played the game a couple of hours or basically the fan inside them do not let them give a fair review to a franchise they like.

 

[Led_Zeppelin]

Yes, anyone can do it. But some reviewers are a lot more skilled than others.

Oh I can't agree more. Which is why I hardly read any reviews from almost no one out there since most have no idea what they are talking about and the only reviewer I care about works as a programmer and does in depth commentary about games and usually take half an hour to explain rather than rush a review for a numerical meaningless 10/10 that can be summarized in less than a minute of reading.

 

[More_Badass]

This. There Is not such a thing as a professional game reviewer , specially when lots of reviews come from people that just played the game a couple of hours or basically the fan inside them do not let them give a fair review to a franchise they like.

"Lots"

Do you have proof to back that up or is that just what you think?

 

[geordiemp]

Yes, anyone can do it. But some reviewers are a lot more skilled than others.

Skilled as in their ability to write an article well I agree, but thats where it stops.

How a gamer likes or appreciates certain games, their likes and dislikes, is no better than any other gamer and is purely subjective.

Very few people will agree on what is their favourite game and type, hence we have a huge variety of games to suit tastes.

 

[Shadowhaxor]

How a gamer likes or appreciates certain games, their likes and dislikes, is no better than any other gamer and is purely subjective..

And there it is. That's the key! Reviews are subjective based on the likes and views of said person reviewing the title. While they're meant to inform, it doesn't mean that every review is final say for the fate of a game.

 

[No_Style]

Depends on the outlet. The GB way of doing reviews seems better suited for common folks. They meet deadlines for the titles they can conceivably beat and form a opinion on without having to crunch. Otherwise, they seem to be okay with releasing reviews around the release window and not necessarily when the embargo is done.

I also enjoy their review style by cultivating the idea that not all video game reviews should be cold and neutral. It's about getting the facts right and conveying your opinion on the game.

 

[RiccochetJ]

Brad Shoemaker is bad at video games.

Spoiler

I love Brad Shoemaker

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

This the cold, hard, truth that nobody wants to admit about God Hand. If a criticism shows up, its always "spankings and gorilla suits tho"

What "truth"? That post hardly says anything about the game, other than giving criticism of the graphics (fair) and of the camera (one of the best in action games). Like, what is that phrase about mechanics even supposed to mean?

 

[SlipperyFishes]

While playing The Witcher 3, I couldn't help but to think how stressing it must be to meet deadlines to give out a certain score or definitive opinion about a given game.

Do you mean that reviewers stress about needing to give a score out without having choice in the matter, or that they are stressed with the idea of scoring low and having the assault after?

Reviews aren't written to a score.

 

[SilentRob]

Oh I can't agree more. Which is why I hardly read any reviews from almost no one out there since most have no idea what they are talking about and the only reviewer I care about works as a programmer and does in depth commentary about games and usually take half an hour to explain rather than rush a review for a numerical meaningless 10/10 that can be summarized in less than a minute of reading.

But "in depth commentary" is not the same as reviewing a game. It's part of your job as an editor to make your point in a reasonable time, breaking down your arguments and figuring out how to verbalise your feelings and opinions on a game. If your game review takes half an hour to read you probably could have done a better job because I can guarantee you a skilled editor can make the same points in a fraction of that time.

A short review is not the same as a rushed review. Trimming down your argument can be the most time consuming part of the whole process - because it forces you to actually figure out what exactly it is that's important for your judgement of the game, instead of simply sharing every single thought you have.

I'm not saying your friends' work is meaningless or worse in any way, shape or form - but what you describe does not desribe a skilled reviewer in journalistic terms.

A great example for this would be Youtuber matthematosis. His videos are amazing! But they aren't helpful as reviews at all, because they literally tell you everything there is to know about the game. He shows everything, he talks about everything and this allows him to analyze them in-depth like few other people do. They are amazing videos to watch after you have finished playing the games yourself, but as a buying guide (because that's what a video game review is) they are pretty much useless (and I don't think they are intended to be one).

 

[jwk94]

It's difficult and it's certainly changed how I view and play games. Even when I'm not assigned to review a certain game, I still play it while thinking of key talking points and footage to use for a review. It makes gaming for relaxation far more difficult, but seeing a good review come together is really satisfying.

 

[Catvoca]

I am an active games journalist/reviewer and yes, this is the hardest part.

Everyone in the office (we are one of the largest mags in business) has a different way of dealing with that. Some start side projects to get their joy/fans out of that (youtubers/streamers), some lose the love and don't invest anything more than their eight hours a day and others seek the better parts of the community. I myself play with a group of readers paradox hardcore strategy games.



It pays absolutly shitty. If i have to leave my current mag i would search for a different job. The payment by smaller publications are just not worth it, even if you love the job.

Thanks for the reply, that sounds pretty rough. I've always viewed the job as something you have to really love to keep doing for more then a view years. It's the reason why you can't really blame someone like Adam Sessler for leaving the industry. His goodbye piece actually paints a pretty grim view of the realities of the job. For the ~1% that get to be GiantBomb or Kinda Funny it looks rad but for the rest it seems pretty tough. Hopefully in the future there's more opportunities for people to make money covering games, but the with way it's going now I'm not so sure.

 

[karnage10]

i'd love to change my life to be a video game reviewer however i don't have neither the language dexterity required nor the support of my family

 

[Led_Zeppelin]

But "in depth commentary" is not the same as reviewing a game. It's part of your job as an editor to make your point in a reasonable time, breaking down your arguments and figuring out how to verbalise your feelings and opinions on a game. You are a bad editor if your game reviews take half an hour to read, because I can guarantee you a skilled editor can make the same points in a fraction of that time.

A short review is not the same as a rushed review. Trimming down your argument can be the most time consuming part of the whole process - because it forces you to actually figure out what exactly it is that's important for your judgement of the game, instead of simply sharing every single thought you have.

I'm not saying your friends' work is meaningless or worse in any way, shape or form - but what you describe does not desribe a skilled reviewer in journalistic terms.

A great example for this would be Youtuber matthematosis. His videos are amazing! But they aren't helpful as reviews at all, because they literally thell you everything there is to know about the game. He shows everything, he takes about everything and this allows him to analyze them in-depth like few other people do. They are amazing videos to watch after you have finished playing the games yourself, but as a buying guide (because that's what a video game review is) they are pretty much useless (and I don't think they are intended to be one).

But you said it yourself, in depth commentaries are better because they basically stop the bullshit and doesn't allow for much room for "feelings" or "personal perceptions" to come into place.

For example I never liked platformers of any kind, but after watching Matthematosis videos (which btw was the person I was referring too in my first post) I could understand why games like Mario 64 or the rest of the 3D series are such well regarded among not only users that likes platformers but also among developers themselves. That insight is far more important than the opinion of someone that doesn't truly grasp why games like Mario 64 were so ground breaking outside of buzzwords or generalities. And by far I think that is the biggest problems with reviews this days. And this comes after years and years of major releases having different disconnections between the fanbase of different games and the "critical" reception said games got. Matthew cuts the bullshit to a minimal and present you with nothing but facts about the game, leaves no room for interpretation there and from there he build his case that is more about technical reviews of how the game works and not how it "feels".

Personally I find far more useful someone like Mathew than say Angry Joe/Jim Sterling/Random IGN reviewer because I actually see how Mathew technical knowledge leave him to arrive to conclusions that are much more solid and thoughtful and grounded than the average review.

Sure Mathew can't be used as a buying guide because he will most likely come out with a review for something like 2 years after the game was released (exceptions being his video about Dark Souls 2 and Bioshock Infinite) but I think I would take that over the alternative.